What Judging Means To YOU! [Archive]

Requiem of Insanity

02-01-10, 10:41 AM

Overall, the judging system is pretty much a solid thing. For the most part it's well done and the scale doesn't seem so overly unbalanced.

My personal gripe with the judging system is something that can't really be avoided, and that's human opinion. Sometimes, and I notice this a lot with certain judges, they tend to let to much of their personal tastes cloud their judgment. The critiques they leave behind are not so much helpful in advising the writer to grow on their own, but instead to grow to be like the judge.

Same issue is also some areas in the rubric the writer feels he did well in, but because the judge doesn't agree with you your score suffers. Examples include swearing in posts, excess violence, talking during battles, and (while no judge really does this anymore) epic anime style battles.

I'll throw myself up there as an example. I use swearing in my posts. It's who the character is. I also use excess violence, again who the character is. She feeds off the torture she inflicts on her opponent, so I express that with her deeds. Now I had one judge who read the story, thought it was all good, and gave me a score I felt i deserved. I had another judge who marked me down for excess violence and swearing, because they didn't feel it was necessary.

This is human opinion, and everyone has one. It's nobodies fault, and it's never going to change. The real point of this rant was to just let the judges know that after you do your judging go back and read what you left as notes. Did you notice you left notes about what YOU didn't like about the thread because it doesn't suit your style.

Kerrigan Muldoon

02-01-10, 11:17 AM

The judging system is a wonderful feature which is THE reason why I came to this site.

There are sites with a high standard but they don't allow the player or the character to grow. Other sites have room for growing but the usually lack a good standard. Althanas however has a high standard, greatly supports becoming a better writer and has unlimited room for character growth.

But of course, as Requiem pointed out: it is not flawless. But I am pretty happy and content with it. A minor flaw is the time it takes to judge, but I know it's because the are too few judges with too much tasks.
The biggest flaw I guess is also what Requiem said: the influence of the judge's opinion.

Another thing I do not like about the system is that it is more combat then quest orientated. In my opinion, a quest with no battles but a great and exciting story should not be punished by its lack of combat.

Duffy

02-01-10, 11:40 AM

I'll go down with the dogs and throw myself happily into the pit - you're right, personal opinion does get in my way, I'll openly admit that I have slipped as of late and allowed personal opinion about artistic form to come through in the way I judge. It's part and parcel of a humanised system, and I aim to ensure that I do not do it again, nor that it happens on the whole (although I say that as a collective effort not as any sign or indication that is is happening).

Whilst it can be difficult to write to the rubric, as equally difficult to judge by it, it is a fundamental part of the way Althanas works but at the same time, it does encourage writing to develop in a certain style, one that has 'experience bonus' underlining it. One that does not allow much, outside of the judge's personal opinion score in the Wild Card, for personal expression or deviation from the 'standard' and somewhat 'stale' way of writing by the book.

So, one of the things that has cropped up is a second type of judgement, one which is available but not often implemented. It'll combine the judging procedure with the Writing Workshop, that will allow the writer to discuss what was intended in a thread (if the structure is odd or unconventional) and give the whole of Althanas a chance to comment, help and discuss the writer's work in a closely monitored (i.e, friendly) environment. People will be able to request these workshop judgements, should it be the general agreement for it to be brought in.

So, I am retraining myself, under the guidance of the other judges and the people I have slipped up with, and am dedicated to focussed and detached judgement, and you have my word that it shall be part and parcel of the judgement procedure once more.

Kerrigan, your comment about action/combat will be considered, whilst 'Action' in the rubric does not always denote swords slicing and feet pounding, you're right in thinking it could be changed or the definition more clearly outlined.

Third and finally, the turnover time for a thread to be judged (depending on the scale of judging requested) will be discussed amongst the community members and a firm but fair time will be agreed upon, one that allows freedom for real life events, and one that ensure some threads arn't posted too quickly, whilst others go months without being judged (the new allocation procedure and the welcome return of Lorenor should see us out of any shortage for the time being!)

Thanks for your time, keep them coming. Your opinion will always count!

Kerrigan Muldoon

02-01-10, 12:40 PM

Btw, I do not care a huge lot about the influence of the judge on the rating, simply because it does not have a huge influence, it's inevitable and it is not always a bad thing.
Even though it is your work which is getting rated, I don't think people should take judgments too seriously: it's just a rough rating from a fellow writer mend to help you get better and reward your writing efforts.

Civilized Savagery

02-01-10, 02:22 PM

I think this is an awesome thread. So everyone is of course absolutely right that judging and all writing criticism is by definition gonna be colored by the reader's own biases. I have a friend who pretty much writes talking heads as they float through the world, with very little regarding the physical world at all. And that bores me a little bit. But when another friend writes these extensive, beautiful (and long) descriptions of wild vistas and whatever, the first person is gonna be bored.

Personal styles are different, it is difficult with the rubric to convey the value of that. My thought is that really though, if the judges do their best to be aware of their biases, and the players keep in mind that there isn't a finite amount of exp, and you can always do another adventure, it's ok to write in whatever your style is. I guarantee that not everyone everywhere is gonna love it, but that's just how it is ^^

I think the writer's workshop variation is a pretty cool idea, though it seems like it can only slow the process down? And I do agree that the judging seems to be a pretty good mechanism overall

Logan

02-01-10, 03:27 PM

So, I've been staring at my computer screen trying to figure out just what I want to say and include in this "discussion" on judging as it currently is and the rubric.

As Kerrigan pointed out so eloquently, "I don't think people should take judgments too seriously: it's just a rough rating from a fellow writer mend to help you get better and reward your writing efforts." Which is, to say, spot on with the overall intent of the rubric and judging system as they are.

The focus is to help the writer see potential areas for improvement and to offer suggestions to support improvement and advancement of writing style, technique, and flow. There are far too many categories that the Judging Staff could judge by, but this rubric has been in use now for a few years and I think the overall base has changed.

I have made mention before that what we essentially end up with on Althanas is a system where the writers write not to the reader, but to the rubric. Now, on the whole this is true, but there are deviations to the rule.

For instance, I have personally witnessed instances where a writer would write an entire thread with a specific judge in mind for the purpose of garnering a higher score based upon that judge's usual criteria and likes and dislikes. Let's be honest. That is an abuse of the system were there ever one.

To me, personally, that is a slap in the face to all judge's as well as to all writer's. I think as writer's it is our responsibility to write to the reader, not the judge or the rubric. If it were not, this would be something other than a game. Yes, the incentive is in place to write to the rubric or even to the judge, but how much more diversified could we be if we wrote to entertain and engage the reader?

What Duffy is proposing with the Writer's Workshop is something I absolutely adore. I believe it will be a means by which judgement can be more effective. My only concern is what sort of incentive's will be in place to utilize such a system, and to what extent will that effect our current judging system.

I would love to see a point where we find a means to combine both standard judgements and the workshop, but without requiring such.

The fact is, simply, we can't please everyone. No matter how hard we try some particular group or player is going to dislike any change(s) made. It is inevitable, and it is human taste. It is the one line by which Althanas walks most carefully.

But judging to me is simply the opportunity for one person with a firm grasp of writing concepts and techniques critiquing my work in a way that offers suggestions for improvement so that I may advance my own writing techniques and concepts to further develop myself as a writer.

Visla Eraclaire

02-01-10, 03:47 PM

Judging means never having to say you're sorry.

Alternatively

Windows Visla(4:48:24 PM): What does it mean to YOU?
(4:49:14 PM): Additionally, how does pacing make you FEEL?
(4:49:44 PM): What impression do you have of questions that end with FULLY CAPITALIZED WORDS?
Sax on the Beach 4:55 pm
(4:55:49 PM): lol
(4:56:34 PM): I think of judging as an excuse to play editor for somebody without the need of being qualified or possessing the brainpower to do it. And of course, reading is optional.
Windows Visla 4:57 pm
(4:57:05 PM): I kind of want to apend my answer to include that

Judges need the 'moral authority' to judge. Without that, I may as well pass out copies of my work to the lines of bedraggled unemployed persons on the street or roll a series of d10s to get a score. Workshop'll be fantastic if you get people to participate. The last one was completely ignored by judge and community.

Chucklecut

02-01-10, 04:10 PM

This thread is interesting. Anyways, I've had a few quests judged under the current rubric (Although on a different character/username), and my one negative thought on it isn't really negative, but more of a side-remark. To be honest, yes, I know sentence structure and readability are a concern, but to me it just feels like to much focus is put on it. Writers... the term is inadequate for what we are. Writers can also be the people that write instruction manuals. Or coupons in newspapers. What we are is more than that. We're storytellers. We're pretty much the modern day equivalent of Bards. Our purpose/desire is to entertain. And I feel like Althanas leans a bit too much toward perfect spelling/grammer/structure/punctuation, and downplays the story side as a repercussion.

Case in point... I've been writing/roleplaying for about 10 years now, on multiple sites on the net. I have a friend who can tell a story that will enthrall you and keep you clicking the Next Page button deep into the wee hours of the morning. The drawback? He is spelling-challenged. The cold, hard fact is that a lot of people on this site would probably refrain from writing with him simply for the fear of their score being lowered because of this. Nevermind the fact that writing with him makes you forget about the more technical side of advancement on this site- you enjoy every minute of it. And yet, here, if he wasn't ostracized, he'd be somewhat near it. Kinda sad, really.

Of course, this isn't to say I advocate the removal of the category in the rubric that deals with this. If I had the power to do so, I wouldn't. I'd simply lower its import, and move it to the story portion. I saw this done somewhere in the Judged threads area. Someone (I forget who) noted that a thread wasn't action oriented, so s/he 'skewed' the rubric maximum numbers to place higher emphasis on the more important/relevant concepts in the thread that the rubric could address.

As far as the Judge's preferences tinting the judgment, it really is a matter worthy of a /shrug. It's like judgments and prejudices in real life. You can't please everyone at once. Some people will love your writing, others won't. If you write only for score, then you aren't really a storyteller at all, you're an ego-maniac. It has to be something more than an attempt to please a crowd. The best stories are ones that are written for yourself, and not another.

If people had the patience for it, which obviously they don't, I'd advise some kind of system that gives "temporary" experience rewards, leaving the thread in question un-judged for six months. After those months had passed, it would fall to the players who wrote the thread to go back and judge themselves. Who here hasn't read some of their old writing and cringed? The passing of time gives the ability to think critically of your one time "baby", and allows you an outside perspective that mixes well with the over-inflated nature of self-criticism, effectively turning the "You are your own worst enemy" thing into a tool that is invaluable. Stephen King recommends something similar when writing- to wait a long time before editing your own story, so you aren't as pained by it, and can make better judgments on what absolutely has to be there.

But of course, since patience is a virtue not commonly found in bulk, this is all a moot point. But hey, I'm okay with dropping a steaming pile of crazy into the public view, so... hah.

Visla: I Lol'd at that. Not hard enough to choke on my smoke, but enough to recognize the irony of it. It's too bad there isn't a dual system made to let people advance equally, but also offered the option of advancing their characters without the need for judgment. There are some people that are okay with their writing, and just want to tell a story. I'm one of them. I don't feel the need or desire to be the uber-best writer in the world. I'm only here for one reason- to tell the stories that would otherwise circulate in my brain-pan and cause me to go senile long before my time.

Hell, why don't we make this all a lot easier. Judges, for now on, post your judgments instantly. Just roll a ten sided dice for each section of the rubric. And don't try to lie to me. I know all of you bastards have ten sided dice. We're all Roleplaying nerds here, after all.

Taskmienster

02-01-10, 04:25 PM

Visla, your responses are what I expected them to be following your decision to leave the staff. Please, if you are going to respond with empty words, don't type them at all. Saxon has his opinion, and if he wanted to add it he could, you don't need to post his opinion for him. However, if he had responded with that I would be telling him the same thing.

The attitude towards the site that you are expressing is counter-productive. Please, refrain from discussions (unless you have something useful to say) and OOC trolling. As a mod you were expected to do so as both a courtesy to the community, as well as being held to a higher standard. I expect that should remain the same even though your name is not italicized anymore.

This is a warning. If you have issues with the staff, the way things are judged, or what goes on with Althanas please bring them up in a more mature manner.

Saxon

02-01-10, 04:32 PM

Saxon has his opinion, and if he wanted to add it he could, you don't need to post his opinion for him. However, if he had responded with that I would be telling him the same thing.

I think of judging as an excuse to play editor for somebody without the need of being qualified or possessing the brainpower to do it. And of course, reading is optional.

Fixed.

Taskmienster

02-01-10, 04:37 PM

And that is deliberate trolling, spamming, and flaming of the staff.

That's your warning.

Visla Eraclaire

02-01-10, 04:38 PM

A brief response to the accusation that this is some kind of retributive trolling: I could have been more cordial. Though I will point out that this is my general demeanor and is not some kind of post-retirement rancor. I spoke out less in public when I was on staff, but you know quite well that I was just as acerbic on the private forums. Also, I am subject to no special duty that clings to me upon leaving the staff other than to abide by the general standard of decency, which I have.

Be that as it may, my legitimate point and opinion, untainted by questionably objectionable phrasing is as follows:

Judges need to be better writers themselves if they are to be taken seriously as judges of the writing of others.

If holding and expressing plainly that opinion is so unpalatable as to be a violation of the rules, I will await disciplinary measures.

Taskmienster

02-01-10, 04:41 PM

What is a "better writer" in the context of a judge on a site devoted as much to the fun of creative writing as it is to learning to write better? I don't think we've had but one person on staff, ever, that was an English Major. That means, to me at least, that the most qualified judges on the site have come because they want to help, and they know how to write. Just because you can't write flawless epic stories doesn't mean you can't edit them. Right?

Saxon

02-01-10, 04:43 PM

And that is deliberate trolling, spamming, and flaming of the staff.

That's your warning.

What's even more sad is that nothing I said in that isn't not true. We've had judges that consistently score 40s, judges who skim or don't even read threads when they post judgments of the threads they're judging, ones who just post numbers and others who pretend they know what they're talking about but really don't. The standard for judging also needs to apply to judges. Its a volunteer job and nobody is putting a gun to your head and calling it a 'workload' so you can just rubberstamp your way through it and clear the way for other players.

If you want to improve judgments, read them. Hire somebody who supervises judges who can both supervise and judge. The fact that all of the faux pas that judges commit are hush-hush on the other side of curtain doesn't make it any more right. If you want to judge, do your job and hire people capable of doing it rather then meatheads who will fill the bill without question or won't commit willfull disobedience.

Visla Eraclaire

02-01-10, 04:47 PM

I never suggested being an English major. If I were to base my standards on education, English would be on the list, but not at the top. Regardless, I don't think that's a good standard.

The fact of the matter is, we have a rubric for determining what a "better writer" is. When judges are selected that receive sub-par scores by our own standards, it diminishes the office, if that's even possible.

Being able to write and being able to evaluate writing do not exist in a 1:1 correlation, but a certain level of writing ability is necessary, if not to actually judge, then to be taken seriously as a judge. Desperation and high turnover has lowered that standard significantly.

To give an analogy to an area where judgment isn't even subjective, you wouldn't want someone who failed mathematics checking the calculations of a brilliant physicist, even if all he has to do is punch in numbers on a machine. There's no subjectivity involved at all there and we still wouldn't feel comfortable. If you want to attract a high quality of writers, you need to provide the service of high quality evaluators.

Kerrigan Muldoon

02-01-10, 05:22 PM

Ah well, some judges won't be terrific or even good writers, if you say so. I don't really care though.

Ironically it was you, Visla, who learned me tread judgments like movie reviews: don't pay too much attention to their rating but use their comments to your liking.

So maybe/probably there are judges who aren't good writers, so maybe you get a lousy rating, useless comments or are just irritated by a lack of quality. Oh no, someone on the internet is wrong?! (http://imgs.xkcd.com/comics/duty_calls.png)

Anyhow, I like writing and I like being helped becoming better. Asking 'bedraggled unemployed persons on the street' to comment my stories might help a little but I am pretty sure Althanas has helped me better so far. Me happy. If Visla, Saxon and lots of others help Althanas to become better at helping writers then I'm even happier.

(On a side note, I am pretty sure I am not morally worthy or whatever, but I hope that won't bother you ;))

Visla Eraclaire

02-01-10, 05:29 PM

But if I leave it alone, they'll keep being wrong.

I stand by my movie reviewer analogy from back in the day, but by the same token, when you don't take the movie reviewer seriously time and time again, you stop bothering to read that publication ;)

Logan

02-01-10, 06:08 PM

I just love when you stumble across an article that explains your point of view so nicely...and get the opportunity to use it in a conversation like this one.

Being an expert is not what you think, probably. For one thing, the article explains that "there is no correlation between IQ and expert performance in fields such as chess, music, sports, and medicine. The only innate differences that turn out to be significant—and they matter primarily in sports—are height and body size."

So what factor does correlate with success? One thing emerges very clearly is that successful performers "had practiced intensively, had studied with devoted teachers, and had been supported enthusiastically by their families throughout their developing years."

Today the standard for being an international success at anything is so high that the authors say you need to spend at least ten years working in a very focused, everyday way on the thing you want to be great at.

http://lifehacker.com/5461598/expertise-requires-time-over-talent-so-get-busy

It's not about how much talent you have. Talent can be squandered after all. But put in the hard work and effort, and you'll find just how great you really can be.

Duffy

02-01-10, 06:09 PM

*Swings Occam's Razor.*

There are some people that are okay with their writing, and just want to tell a story. I'm one of them. I don't feel the need or desire to be the uber-best writer in the world. I'm only here for one reason- to tell the stories that would otherwise circulate in my brain-pan and cause me to go senile long before my time.

Simplistic, to the point, and worthy of note.

Visla Eraclaire

02-01-10, 06:10 PM

That article's a non sequitur, at least as regards my point about qualified judges. I don't care whether you're a capable writer because you have an inherent, inborn talent. You're welcome to work hard, practice, and get better at it.

Do that before you're declared judge, supervising judge, or anything else.

I'm not sure that's an appropriate application of Occom's Razor, Duffy. People overuse that phrase. Remember that it only prefers simplicity with all else being equal.

Slavegirl

02-01-10, 06:14 PM

To quote one of the great thinkers of our time:

All I ask of you is one thing: please don't be cynical. I hate cynicism- it's my least favorite quality and it doesn't lead anywhere.

Nobody in life gets exactly what they thought they were going to get. But if you work really hard and you're kind, amazing things will happen.

Think positive, try hard, and be nice. It's not that difficult. You just have to get over yourself enough to do it and amazing things will happen. And honestly, I think that's what Althanas is all about, or at least used to be. If we strive to build each other up both as writers and as people, and work hard to improve ourselves, all while being courteous and thoughtful of each others thoughts and feelings, then we can achieve a lot more than being hyper-critical and expecting lots of gain for just a little work. That goes for writers and judges alike.

Taskmienster

02-01-10, 06:24 PM

What's even more sad is that nothing I said in that isn't not true. We've had judges that consistently score 40s, judges who skim or don't even read threads when they post judgments of the threads they're judging, ones who just post numbers and others who pretend they know what they're talking about but really don't.

It's not true, and that's flaming the staff. You've already been warned.

But if I leave it alone, they'll keep being wrong.

You were proven wrong by Kerrigan, and by your own admission are continuing to argue for nothing more than to try and prove other people wrong. That's spamming. You've already been warned as well.

Given permission, so you're both banned for a week starting now. You've had plenty of warnings in countless threads before this thread, both as a mod and before then.

Duffy

02-01-10, 06:26 PM

I'm not sure that's an appropriate application of Occom's Razor, Duffy. People overuse that phrase. Remember that it only prefers simplicity with all else being equal.

I would love to discuss the theoretical applications of the razor with you Visla, but since you prefer pedantry, I won't waste too much time in doing so. All 'else' in this thread is indeed equal, as they are all individual opinions holding no preference above one another. The most simplistic explanation on the other hand, is one that leaves the writer, and the judge, doing what they do best, most naturally, and what they most enjoy; no need for further explanation of variables.

If you do not like the writing ability or lack thereof of other individuals on this forum or anywhere else on this sodden little planet, you can invest in the time to remove yourself from it. You're no longer 'burdened' with all our dreary, self indulgent and expressive prose, you are free to pick and choose who you write with and ignore all the other threads. Many people choose to do so here already, have at it.

I have no need to defend myself, my ability, my responsibilities in this role or any other to people who see no reason or logic in looking at the bigger picture. If you can't see that a monkey can tick boxes without knowing what those boxes mean, that is your prerogative, not mine.

But I rather like being the new monkey in town ;).

Godhand

02-01-10, 08:44 PM

EXTRA! EXTRA! READ ALL ABOUT lT!

UNPOPULAR OPINIONS = SPAMMING!

Seriously though, as far as judging goes...Shit, who knows? It's such a goddamn minefield. Even bitching about mods just seems like sour grapes unless you're consistently scoring in the nineties. As far as I'm concerned, the system works well enough. To tell you the truth I never gave a fuck about scores at all, only the exp that you got from high scores. This is mostly a game to me; occasionally I'll write something I feel is excellent and think the judge totally dropped the ball by not bowing down and worshiping my dong but, shit, who cares? The exp is still good, I like it...

Hmm.

You know this is something to think about. You can't really, like I said before, you can't really call out judges if you haven't judged yourself because then you look like a bitch. And I hate to be the sort of dumbass queen that goes "I LIKE IT, AND THAT'S ALL THAT MATTERS!" But if I were to take the position of an unkind observer, I still feel that even at my worst my writing is competent, right up there at least with all the putrid fantasy dreck that paid-by-the-word authors churn out. It's always passable; readable. And that's enough to keep the game going, so fuck it.

Caden Law

02-01-10, 08:54 PM

I hereby propose this thread be derailed into talking about Godhand and hookers.

All in favor?

Slavegirl

02-01-10, 09:05 PM

Aye.

Logan

02-01-10, 09:51 PM

Godhand, may I be the first to say... "Please come back." I actually miss you. Seriously. I didn't realize how much you added to the game until recently, and now I miss that. So ya, get your arse back and start roleplaying again so your char can kick Logan's arse from here to there and everywhere.

NightCast

02-01-10, 11:19 PM

Godhand, be aware: I'm framing that post.

The Wildcard needs to go. It sucks my fuzzy left nut. It can be used in a biased manner that is detrimental, especially competitively, and this IS a game.

I find it to be a piss poor item on the rubric, especially when in tournaments it saved a team on more than one occasion; the most recent being the abusive manner in which it was used in the ToC (i.e. Petoux awarded 7 points for "coming out and trying", thus handing a 1.5 average point win to his team). It's far too easily abused, and that's my biggest problem with it and sapped a lot of the fun out of writing here in general. Why, do I want to be cut down, just because I'm not on good terms with the judge? How is that fair, and why should I bother working my ass off just to fear being short-changed just because I didn't brown my nose enough in the judge's ass? Now this is mostly hypothetical, as most of you do a reasonable job, but for some... well, let's just let it go at that.

Logan

02-01-10, 11:34 PM

The Wild Card category is meant to give judge's a mean to balance out what they feel needs balancing out. It's not meant to decide a match, except in extreme circumstances. It's all about the judge's likes and dislikes, and I'm not really sure eliminating it is a great idea. Perhaps coming up with a better weighted rubric might be a good step.

That way things such as Wild Card and Technique have less weight than Story, Character, and Creativity type things.

Just a thought.

Chucklecut

02-02-10, 12:42 AM

Forgive me, Logan. Just thought I'd point this out. All of this said by you, first quote post #7

For instance, I have personally witnessed instances where a writer would write an entire thread with a specific judge in mind for the purpose of garnering a higher score based upon that judge's usual criteria and likes and dislikes. Let's be honest. That is an abuse of the system were there ever one.

Next quote, also yours. Post #30

It's not meant to decide a match, except in extreme circumstances. It's all about the judge's likes and dislikes, and I'm not really sure eliminating it is a great idea.

... Logan, are you straddling the fence here, or am I just misunderstanding?

It seems like you are saying that you recognize that Wild Card is an obvious entry vector for cheaters on both sides of the fence, and yet you stand against it's removal. Why?

And no, I'm not flinging accusations. Just trying to figure out your exact stance, and gather a bit of insight to why the category's pros outweigh it's cons.

And by the by, Richard Avatar = win.

Logan

02-02-10, 12:52 AM

No, you aren't totally incorrect, nor are you correct.

As a previous judge, I have found a use for Wild Card that to me proved useful. However, it should be weighted (meaning a lower ceiling, ie: 5 instead of 10) in order to give more weight to those categories where certain qualities are desired more than another.

For instance, Wild Card currently weights as much as Dialogue. To me personally, that isn't really fair, as our goal and focus is to improve the writing of our authors (and as someone else pointed out, story tellers). If Wild Card were only weighted a maximum of 5, and other categories weighted more effectively, it would encourage improvement rather than as Godhand said, the gaming aspects.

It has been a fundamental question since it's inception, and one I posed to our entire Staff not long ago. For fun, I will post it as a separate thread for discussion, and one I am curious to see everyone's responses, too. I'll link to it mometarily.

But no, I am against our writers writing to a specific judge's preferences. That has nothing to do with Wild Card inherently, but with it being weighted as it is, it does. I wouldn't want to see it completely go away, as it is a useful category on a small scale. For instance, if I see a newbie whom I've judged previously attempting my suggestions from the previous judgement in their current thread, I am likely to give them one or two wild card points for it.

Now, obviously, in a battle this is a little different, and I only award Wild Card points if certain things within the writing catch my eye.

These are just little things that allow for judge's/moderator's discretion, which really is what we do need. After all, while we all may be human and it is an inherent that we are imperfect, there are those who do things the right way. If we become too rigid with too much structure, we might become too schooly, and that's not the intention of this site.

P.S. -- FOR PONY!

Yes...Richard = Win.

Taskmienster

02-02-10, 09:58 AM

As a judge, lemme tell you what Wild Card is when I'm looking at a thread. WC is normally just an average for me, most of the time. If the average score you got for each category was a 5, and I didn't see anything outstanding that stood out, or anything awful that stood out, I'll just give the average.

WC, on the other hand, for me at least, is normally used as a way of docking points for powergaming and bunnying, and whatever else might have been an abuse. If someone throws a fit and does something completely rude (I've done that a few times) I would give a 0 for the section. However, if someone is just pushing through and trying to deal with some issue (such as losing all the people that had joined their thread and finishing it solo so they could continue on and not leave it dead) I might give extra points for the WC section.

Amaril Torrun

02-02-10, 10:11 PM

What does judging mean to me?

To be honest, I don’t like to use the word judging when it comes to Althanas’ rubric. Sure, that’s the title of that final post in all our threads, where numbers arrive and rewards are handed out, but that particular word just doesn’t seem to fit for me. It has a ringing tone of finality and harshness that I do everything in my power to avoid when I read through someone’s hard work.

Evaluation. That’s a slightly more appropriate term for what the rubric is focused on. It is a building block to furthering a writer’s ability in the various forms necessary to portraying their own creative thoughts in a clear and enjoyable manner. It is meant to show our growing writers (myself definitely included) how to pace our stories, so as to not have our readers go “Whoa! What just happened? Is it over?” or “Oh my God, will this thing ever end?”

It is meant to help us learn how to make our readers feel like they are truly at the scene, feeling the cool grit of dirt between the characters toes and smelling that vile dung some bear left behind an hour before. It is meant to teach us how to make our characters become so alive, so viable, that our readers know the big oaf is going to leap across to bar to pick a fight before he does it. Or make our readers cry over the character’s pain of a lost loved one.

It is meant to teach us how to make our words flow together in a coordinated manner, making it as easy as possible for our readers to follow our story. It is meant to teach us how to add just enough flair to our writing, so as to make it enjoyable to our readers and keep our material from becoming stale after the fourth page.

There is no finality to this rubric, because every time you read one written for your thread, you should come away with some new idea or suggestion you could incorporate into your writing. There is no finality, because there is always some aspect of your writing that you could improve. Even if you’ve hit the twentieth anniversary of that first short story you wrote as a kid, and you’ve abilities have grown to the point that the world had adored and revered your work a hundred times over. I bet even the greatest writers of all time could look back at every piece they wrote and slap themselves for a better way to write that line or how they used the second best word in the dictionary for that phrase, rather than the absolute best.

Christoph

02-03-10, 03:34 PM

You know it’s bad when –I- drop in after, what, three months? The end is clearly nigh. I happen to have a strong opinion on the subject (though expressing opinions seems to have gotten dangerous lately).

I find the judging system to be decent in concept. Maybe it could go for a little tweaking, both in the category values and the EXP formula, but nothing major. Like I said, it’s a good –system-, just like the United States presents a good theoretical system. The problem in both cases stems from the people IN the system.

I will be frank; I haven’t taken the Althanas judging staff seriously in quite a while. I’m sorry if that offends anyone. I find writing skill to be an important trait in a judge. How can you trust a judgment that’s handed out by someone who doesn’t display much of the higher skill they attempt to critique? And even if a judge does possess some decent literary knowledge and skill, many judgments look like the product of someone who skimmed the thread, picked out a couple things along the way to randomly comment on, and arbitrarily assigned some numbers.

Then there are all the requirements for quests that hinder the growth of writers. You’re basically stuck with the same character all the time, and get penalized if you stray beyond it. True short stories are all but impossible to write without super-short posts (which most judges would dock points for), as solo quests need to be at least 10 posts or 10,000 words long. As a result, many writers needlessly pad their writing to meet the length requirements.

Because of all that, a good judging system is rendered ineffective. I have improved considerably more in my writing over the past three months outside of Althanas than I did in the last year to year in a half that I was on Althanas. Some of you might be thinking, “Well, if you feel that way, don’t bother coming back.” To that I would reply, “Yes, that is the general idea.” However, it is sad that this site, which had once been a great place to write, no longer has anything substantial to offer someone like me.

Max Dirks

02-03-10, 04:27 PM

I find writing skill to be an important trait in a judge.You don't have to be a good writer to understand how to write. For example, law school has made me a terrible creative writer, but it hasn't impeded my ability to judge. If anything, technical writing has opened my eyes to the importance of pacing and clarity in creative writing, which is something I used to overlook in favor of brevity and mechanics.

If folks have problems with judges, simply request to have your thread 'judged' in the Writer's Workshop (that unused sub-forum of the RPC) and the community at large will give you input on how to get better. Surely there is someone here with superior writing skills who can critique you that you will take seriously.

Christoph

02-03-10, 04:55 PM

You don't have to be a good writer to understand how to write. For example, law school has made me a terrible creative writer, but it hasn't impeded my ability to judge.

With all due respect Dirks, I don’t even know how to respond to that without being accused of flaming. Therefore, I won’t.

If folks have problems with judges, simply request to have your thread 'judged' in the Writer's Workshop (that unused sub-forum of the RPC) and the community at large will give you input on how to get better. Surely there is someone here with superior writing skills who can critique you that you will take seriously.

Why would anyone submit a thread to the writing workshop, when it would undoubtedly be ignored because there is no incentive for other members to bother participating? Furthermore, what’s the point in having judges at all if the official staff opinion is, “If you don’t like the judges, don’t bother with them”?

Logan

02-03-10, 05:33 PM

Because some of our players actually respect the other players enough to believe they, just like our judges, have something worthwhile to contribute from a critiquing standpoint. And I'm with them on that.

This thread is not about not having judges. Please do not question the importance of them. If not for them, Althanas would not be here.

Christoph

02-03-10, 05:53 PM

Because some of our players actually respect the other players enough to believe they, just like our judges, have something worthwhile to contribute from a critiquing standpoint. And I'm with them on that.

You clearly either misunderstood or willfully misinterpreted what I said. My qualm with the writing workshop is that no other members bother to review the threads posted there, which is understandable because they have no incentive to.

This thread is not about not having judges. Please do not question the importance of them. If not for them, Althanas would not be here.

See the opening statement used above. I never stated that judges were a bad idea in concept. I merely made the case that, given the apparent attitude presented by the staff regarding the obvious justing problems, there might as well not be any. There’s a big difference between the two.

Max Dirks

02-03-10, 06:06 PM

My qualm with the writing workshop is that no other members bother to review the threads posted there, which is understandable because they have no incentive to. How do you know? Only one person has requested their thread to be judged in that manner so far. The ones who wanted other things reviewed received responses.

Christoph

02-03-10, 06:33 PM

Let’s consider this for a moment. One person essentially posted a character profile, and got little in response beyond what he/she would have received from the Registration area in the RoG. Another posted a story, and got one reply after the first post that basically amounted to a “nice story”, and then nothing else following that. Better results could be had from Creative Endeavors. The one actual quest that arrived in the Writing Workshop got absolutely nothing. Admittedly, with a small sample size, we can’t draw a flawless conclusion, but the weight of evidence is still in favor of “people ignore the workshop.” Therefore, it seems like a huge waste of effort to complete a quest and risk the workshop, where it will likely get ignored.

Duffy

02-03-10, 06:48 PM

Slayer of the Rot

02-03-10, 07:03 PM

That you don't have to be a good writer to be a good judge is a completely batshit insane theory to me. A judgement is meant to not only render a score, but to give advice on how a person could improve. If I finish a thread and ask for judgement, I'm not going to want to get writing and grammar advice from someone playing a Sephiroth or Inuyasha clone who can't tell the difference between your and you're, or even construct two simple english sentences together.

I am far from the greatest writer to ever live. I have my flaws, I realize this, but I'm beyond the point of stressing myself to meet the standards of a rubric. A thread like this....christ, it's a little pretentious, isn't it? I understand something for members to tell you what they think should change for judgings, but you guys have kind of just careened headlong into a score of longwinded, dry, collegiate tl;dr posts.

Let's put it this way; I accept my flaws and work on improving them on my own. Judgements to me are a way to the reward system. I'd rather receive numbers and a score I'll gloss over at the end of the thread than a bullet point bulletin of what someone claims I've done wrong and what they think I can do better on.

Duffy

02-03-10, 07:07 PM

Let's put it this way; I accept my flaws and work on improving them on my own. Judgements to me are a way to the reward system. I'd rather receive numbers and a score I'll gloss over at the end of the thread than a bullet point bulletin of what someone claims I've done wrong and what they think I can do better on.

Perfect. Would you, as an individual, accept a simple, permanent short commentary judgement form for all of Althanas's submitted threads? The idea being the workshop could be used if individuals want more detail, or if they believe they need literary aid to begin with. The workshop could simply be an altered form of 'middle' and 'anally retentive length' commentary, where everyone, should they wish, can get involved as opposed to burdening a judge (several of you made comments about 'not a job,') with the intricate task of scrutinising every little line.

Would that be a compromise, alongside a return to judgement on the basis of improvement and the rubric?

Christoph

02-03-10, 07:43 PM

If we're going to continue to use the 'good writer = good judge' line you have to consider the simple idea that a judge's judgement and a judge's writing might not be connected. By that I mean they might be writing poorly or far too good because that's how they write. Understanding the fundamental tenets of writing, of style, form and grammar is one thing, applying it in your own world is another, and commenting on it's use elsewhere is another.

Yet, a solid foundation is needed in order to effectively critique someone else’s writing. Furthermore, while a good writer isn’t automatically a good judge, being a good judge depends heavily on being a good writer. Otherwise, it’s like teaching someone how to do something that you’ve never actually done.

Then there's the old addage, 'one man's meat...' Some might perceive X or Y's work as godly, others, dire, art is interpretative and qualitative, it's based on position and vantage point and experience. No matter how well or boringly formulaic (or fruity) someone writes, they should detach their own experience of the written form when judging, they should return to the bare bone definition and pattern recognition required.

That’s very nice, but it does nothing to prove your point. Of course judges should set aside their biases when judging, so that they can respect the merit and delivery of different styles, but that does not make writing competence any less crucial for the judge.

Many lecturers can't write or spell to save their lives, but they're PhD students who are given the task of critiquing other's work - I know this as a fact, my Identity & Diversity lecturer's slides have jumbled sentences and abysmal referencing every week. Does this devalue her ability to mark assignments? No, not in the slightest.

That premise is invalid because academic writing is extremely different from creative writing, beyond the very basic grammatical structure, which a computer can review and fix. Furthermore, while I wouldn’t care if, say, a chemistry professor had bad grammar, but I would care if the professor sucked at chemistry. And finally, I have had four English high school teachers and three college English professors. Three from that mix were terrible writers, and all three were rather lackluster at critiquing and reviewing. The other four were pretty good and, shock, were good at critiquing our work.

I can write, I know this through my assignment scores from university and the excellent progress made up until now. I am endeavouring with every word to improve now, whilst I have the time to sit down and edit my posts, even if it takes a week or two of minor edits before submitting.

I won’t even respond to that, and only partly because it has no relevance to the argument.

Judge's should learn to recognise traits in writing that match plus and minus points from the rubric, mark the work accordingly, make comments based on the rubric,

A process that can be helped along by having effectively and reliably used higher level techniques of storytelling, prose, and characterization, as then the judge has a more intimate understanding of what they’re looking for, even if the thread clashes with their own style.

and assign 'arbitrary scores' (which is bullshit, they're assigned based on performance ideally, according to the primer)

IDEALLY, scores are awarded based on performance. Ideally, but not always in practice. Simply put, it is the logical progression from when judge apathy meets a lack of accountability, which is often the case.

and of course, rewards. By all means, a judge with a 'decent and controlled' writing style can offer better commentary, pinpoint problems others couldn't, but if training is delivered effectively, a judge is a judge is a judge.

Any ‘effective training’ would largely involve making the judge a better writer. There is only so much somebody can learn in a theoretical sense if they haven’t learned to use it in a practical sense.

There's clearly rejection of the workshop idea, I don't need a BA to see that (give me a year :p) and given the feedback from here and elsewhere, it will be reconsidered, but I assure you, the discussion has been instrumental in assuring a better and reformed judging system is restored -

Only worthwhile incentives will fix the writing workshop. And even then, the same thing, only better, can be received from other forums that are dedicated to that style of review. They just lack the ‘game’ aspect.

Visla might claim that judges should never say sorry. But sorry, he is wrong - if we, I, or us make any sort of mistake in our role, we should certainly apologise.

I made mistakes, I have apologised, I will now strive to right those wrongs.

It is good that you are eager to learn from your mistakes, but the fact remains that repeated judge mistakes can set writers in the wrong direction for months and effectively arrest their growth. Sure, mistakes will always happen, but many could and can be avoided by holding a high standard for hiring judges. It may sound harsh, but I’m clearly not the only one who feels this way. Two who do got banned, and who knows how many are afraid to speak up for fear of being banned as well.

Duffy

02-03-10, 08:09 PM

It is good that you are eager to learn from your mistakes, but the fact remains that repeated judge mistakes can set writers in the wrong direction for months and effectively arrest their growth.

I made two mistakes with judgement posts, and this was due to being the most active judge over the Christmas period. I took that extra and unnecessary responsibility on to myself in a somewhat futile attempt to ensure that judgement threads were done fairly expediently. In my rush, and my lack of attention, I let myself slip. I tried to do 'my best' to ensure the site continued and clearly, I caused more harm to my own sense of self and writing than would've occurred had I not done so.

Sure, mistakes will always happen, but many could and can be avoided by holding a high standard for hiring judges. It may sound harsh, but I’m clearly not the only one who feels this way.

I did not expect you to be the only one Christoph, which was why one of the first things I did following the 'appointment' was to post this thread. Your points in the rest of your post are valid, well-placed and not, and it is these sorts of things I was hoping for when I clicked post.

Two who do got banned, and who knows how many are afraid to speak up for fear of being banned as well.

I have apologised, publically for my mistakes. I have 're-trained' and refocused my attention from writing at a stupendously quick pace without care for style and proof reading to the pursuit of being a judge. I will continue to ensure I write to the best of my ability and deliver on the responsibilities of my role.

If you, or any other person here wishes to question the hiring process, or has any complaint against the decisions ongoing or my position, you can address them either to another moderator or admin. I am willing at least to do my best and to work harder, I am willing to listen to you, the fellow writers, and I am willing keep doing so.

*Swings away on a chandelier eating a banana.*

Taskmienster

02-03-10, 08:12 PM

Can we, please, get away from "How terrible judges are we have, whoo is me." and get back to the topic of the thread. If there is no point to this thread than former staff members coming to the site to cause trouble, that's counter-productive to the site as well as to the discussion.

If you have nothing nice to say... and all that.

Max Dirks

02-03-10, 09:46 PM

If I finish a thread and ask for judgement, I'm not going to want to get writing and grammar advice from someone playing a Sephiroth or Inuyasha clone who can't tell the difference between your and you're, or even construct two simple english sentences together. There's an obvious difference. Let's take an example. JRR Tolkien wrote like shit, grammatically and structurally. However, he's often regarded as the best fantasy writer of all time. I'm sure players here would jump at the bit to have him judge one of their threads. You can't mix stylistic changes with usage and grammar mistakes. Let your text editors and word processors catch your grammatical mistakes, when I judge you I'm looking at your style, flow, and character development. Sure, I write technically, but picking up that is child's play.

On a side note, if you folks think you're a skilled writer, then why haven't you applied to be a judge?

Godhand

02-03-10, 09:50 PM

On a side note, if you folks think you're a skilled writer, then why haven't you applied to be a judge?

Because I don't hate myself.

Rayse Valentino

02-03-10, 10:00 PM

Man, you staff members sure seem active. Maybe active enough to judge the FQ threads and maybe end the FQ finally? I don't know.

As for judging, it's usually the only time someone other than the person I'm doing the thread with actually reads my posts, although often times the people I'm with don't read my posts so the judge is my only hope for attention!

Anyway, the kind of judging you get depends on who is doing it. I have seen some heinously judged threads, and there is absolutely no oversight for them. I'm aware it's not a fun job, but if you're not doing it right then might as well throw out the whole system and let those productive members focus on producing content instead of closure.

Christoph

02-03-10, 10:07 PM

Task. When did rationally outlining some critical issues with site for the sake of alleviating them become counter-productive? Seems more like the very definition of -productive-. Unpopular statements are not always unproductive, and popular ones are not always productive. Discouraging dialogue on the matter, however, is definitely counter-productive.

I did not expect you to be the only one Christoph, which was why one of the first things I did following the 'appointment' was to post this thread. Your points in the rest of your post are valid, well-placed and not, and it is these sorts of things I was hoping for when I clicked post.

I have a tendency to say what needs to be said, not what is pleasant to hear. It's good that you came in hoping for the former.

I have apologised, publically for my mistakes. I have 're-trained' and refocused my attention from writing at a stupendously quick pace without care for style and proof reading to the pursuit of being a judge. I will continue to ensure I write to the best of my ability and deliver on the responsibilities of my role.

If you, or any other person here wishes to question the hiring process, or has any complaint against the decisions ongoing or my position, you can address them either to another moderator or admin. I am willing at least to do my best and to work harder, I am willing to listen to you, the fellow writers, and I am willing keep doing so.

I’m not sure what sort of mistakes you’re referring to, but I would venture that you have made more mistakes than you’re aware of. It’s not a personal attack. Any judge can sometimes give bad advice, often without realizing it. It can send writers in bad directions and generally hinder their improvement. That is why writing experience and prowess is so important. That is why training judges rigorously BEFORE setting them to work is crucial. And that is why the judging system has needed, still needs, and will always need more accountability. It’s good that you’re making an effort, and I certainly wish you luck, but I hope you take no offense from me saying that restoring credibility to the judging staff won’t be easy. I honestly don't hold out much hope.

Kerrigan Muldoon

02-04-10, 03:28 AM

Let me summarize the topic so far:

Problems:
1. Some think the system is good, though it's not flawless.
2. Some think the system is good, even though it's not flawless because they see the judgments as a mere helpful evaluation.
3. Some think the system is good, but like to tweak the rubric a little.
4. Some think the system is good, but the writers have started to write for the rubric.
5. Some think the system is good, but some of the judges are not (too biased and/or lack writing skills themselves).
6. Some think the system is good, even though the judges are not flawless (because they are still competent).
7. Some don't take the system very serious, but just are happy just writing.

Note: 'some' can be one person or the whole site.

Proposed solutions for above opinions:
1. n/a
2. n/a
3. Remove or lower the WC. Others commented it's not the rubric but the judge using it.
4. No real solution has been proposed for this, but I guess spreading opinion 1-2 (or 7) would be a solution?
5. A higher standard for judging. Others commented good judging does not correlate with good writing (at least not beyond the point of basic grammar).
6. n/a
7. n/a

My conclusions:
I. Almost nobody thinks it's the system itself which is seriously flawed because it's mainly depends on how it used. So lets not change the rubric but how it is used.
II. I think we can all agree that writers should stop writing for the rubric, right?
III. The main discussion is about whether or not the judge's standard/quality is high/good enough. Odd enough this seems to be an ex-staff vs staff discussion.

My solutions:
It would at least solve the tension of people would take the judgment system less serious. So, I propose:
A. Let's change the whole 'judging' theme into 'evaluation'.

Whether or not you think the current standard for judges is good or not, increased quality is always a good thing, right? But how to do that can be quite complicated, you could either:
B1. Set a higher writing quality standard for judges and/or give more and better training and/or more and better supervising.
OR:
B2. Instead of one, have two-three evaluators evaluate a thread (without them knowing how the others have evaluated it).
Solution B1 will reduce the number of evaluators while solution B2 will require more (or sacrifice evaluation speed and/or depth). But with B2 the final evaluation is an average of two-three so a single evaluation is less important. Perhaps that will result in less (emotional) burden? In my opinion it will also lower the need for a higher standard.

Possible future research:
Personally I'm pretty interested if a significant part of the judges indeed receive low scores. Perhaps somebody can average the last four or so scores of every judge? Or even better: why not let every judge list the last eight or so?
At least that will give us insight in whether or not that claim is true or not.

Duffy

02-04-10, 03:44 AM

*Snip.*

My solutions:
It would at least solve the tension of people would take the judgment system less serious. So, I propose:
A. Let's change the whole 'judging' theme into 'evaluation'.

Whether or not you think the current standard for judges is good or not, increased quality is always a good thing, right? But how to do that can be quite complicated, you could either:
B1. Set a higher writing quality standard for judges and/or give more and better training and/or more and better supervising.
OR:
B2. Instead of one, have two-three evaluators evaluate a thread (without them knowing how the others have evaluated it).
Solution B1 will reduce the number of evaluators while solution B2 will require more (or sacrifice evaluation speed and/or depth). But with B2 the final evaluation is an average of two-three so a single evaluation is less important. Perhaps that will result in less (emotional) burden? In my opinion it will also lower the need for a higher standard.

Possible future research:
Personally I'm pretty interested if a significant part of the judges indeed receive low scores. Perhaps somebody can average the last four or so scores of every judge? Or even better: why not let every judge list the last eight or so?
At least that will give us insight in whether or not that claim is true or not.

I love you.

Seriously, this is fantastic, thank you!

My last scores were, in no particular order, 45, 54, 65, 61, 76 and probably another 45. So I'd say an average of 57-60. Baring in mind that 3-4 of these threads were written within the space some of you take to write a single post, which isn't a good thing, evidently, from the low scores. (2 were 'speed' exercises, which got 65 and 54 respectively, so imagine what would happen if I proof read and edited before submitting!) I can and have and will continue to aim for 60+, and that lone and solitary 76 will be beaten or matched hopefully when I get the balance between patience and proof reading right.

There is a flaw with this question, however, as some judges don't write anymore due to real life constraints, or don't write often enough (but do so very well when it does happen).

I'm all for 'quality control,' but that runs the risk of setting the bar too high, giving a very small pool of people that are deemed 'able.' Or, it is set too low, and we get this sort of thing happening. Where's the middle ground?

Letho

02-04-10, 04:57 AM

Whether or not you think the current standard for judges is good or not, increased quality is always a good thing, right? But how to do that can be quite complicated, you could either:
B1. Set a higher writing quality standard for judges and/or give more and better training and/or more and better supervising.
OR:
B2. Instead of one, have two-three evaluators evaluate a thread (without them knowing how the others have evaluated it).
Solution B1 will reduce the number of evaluators while solution B2 will require more (or sacrifice evaluation speed and/or depth). But with B2 the final evaluation is an average of two-three so a single evaluation is less important. Perhaps that will result in less (emotional) burden? In my opinion it will also lower the need for a higher standard.I believe this is something we'd all like. However, this could also cause additional problems.

In case of B1, the number of judges would decrease, because we don't have a large enough of a pool of good writers that have both the time and the drive to judge threads. Most of these "good writers" are already judging or have done so at some point of their career on Althanas. So while narrowing the selection could up the quality, it would fall on those selected few to do all the work. And as history proved many times over, that makes people burn out way too fast. As for improved training, usually to make someone a better judge, you need to make him a better writer. And there's no surefire way to do that, no manual to read that would hone your skills. Judges and writers are like trees; they take a while to grow.

In case of B2, the waiting for the thread to be judged would go up at least twofold, especially if combined with B1. I'm not saying it's a bad idea; on the contrary, four or six sets of eyes see more than just two. But I just don't think it's possible right now.

Now, don't get me wrong. I'm not trying to shoot down these ideas or anything, but merely say that this isn't the first time I hear about them and that they have had at least once been taken under consideration in the past by the staff. However, resources are limited and we have to make do with what we have.

Back in the day - and I'm most definitely not trying to sleight the current judges in any way - when the "heavy hitters" such as Shyam and Manda and Findelfin were up and running, things were different. The very demography of the site was different, with staff members being younger with less responsibilities in real life. Nowadays, most of us have jobs or college or both, and few have the luxury to dedicate themselves to the site fully. On top of that, on average the quality of writing back then wasn't as good as it was today. So what we have now is content that needs more attention, but the administration with less time to do so and smaller member pool from which to recruit new staff members. And there's simply no instant solution to that the way I see it.

Anyways, that's my two bits worth. For what it's worth. :P

Kerrigan Muldoon

02-04-10, 05:05 AM

Yeah, I figured that would be the major flaw.

Me personally don't care whether my topic gets evaluated within two days or two weeks. Sure, two days is nicer, but I'm fine with two+ weeks. While I can certainly understand those who like to have their thread evaluated asap, I think it would be a good thing to be patient (and care more about the thread then the evaluation).

What's your opinion in changing judging into evaluating? It's a mere change name which might inspire a new view upon the whole system. And the timing is nice: together with the changed index.

Letho

02-04-10, 06:02 AM

In all truth, I don't really care what we call it as long as the main concept remains the same. I guess "judging" could be perceived as a bit of a harsh word, and I don't see how it would hurt to change it.

Also, let me just add that I realize ours is not a perfect system. It wasn't a perfect system when I was starting out and the rubric was different, it probably wasn't prefect before that and most likely won't ever be perfect. But I owe about 50% of my current writing skill to this system and the people that made that system work. Granted, what worked for me doesn't necessarily have to work for others. But it's still a very good way to improve yourself as a writer.

Chucklecut

02-04-10, 07:13 AM

Random Observations:

People writing to the Rubric instead of writing to the story is a relatively easy thing to fix, though it would require enough work for it to be a pain in the ass. Only thing that would need to be done is the Rubric would have to be changed in no certain way. And then, get this fun little bit.... Don't release it to the public. Yeah, it's an almost dictator way of going about it. People can't cater to the rubric if they don't know it.

Non-random request:

Probed at several pages back. When it becomes feasible for you Judges/Mods to take a few minutes out of the day, please for the love of god come up with a system that allows equal advancement without requiring "judgment". I don't care about scores. I'm okay with my writing as it is. I have 2 threads waiting to be judged so I can proceed in my writing. That boils down to my threads holding up other people's threads. So... The people in line behind me that actually care about scores and judgment are waiting on mine so that they can get theirs... and again... I really don't care about it. Kinda seems unfair. Fun thing is, for a system that doesn't require traditional judgment (I.E: what I'd want), it'd be just fine for a mod to skim the posts and award experience or whatever based on post count/story length, or some other random factor.

My main problem with the current system is that Althanas is partially a game, and yet it's the only game I can think of where effort is minimalized by pure skill/talent. Yeah, talent is important. But when you get lower rewards than everyone else while still putting in the same amount of effort, I think we can all agree that's a little fucked. Hell, the problem could be bridged a bit better if the Rubric included effort as a category, rather than just folding it into other places. It could even include little bits like "forshadowing", which I've seen attributed to damn near every category you've got. I've seen it in wild card, pacing, mechanics...

But again, I digress.

TL;DR:

1. It'd be epic of you mods to find a way to make Judging optional, since it actually LOWERS the fun-factor of Althanas to people that don't care about scores.

2. Don't complain about cheating when you publicly show them how to do it. (http://althanas.com/world/faq.php?faq=exp#faq_introexp) Alternatively, change the topic of that FAQ entry to "How to artificially and mechanically tailor your writing to the judges of this site's tastes and receive better rewards."

And yes, I'm writing this at 7 AM. If my comments are snarky, take them for what they are. I'm tired and I'm got an opinion I can't keep to myself, Damn it!

Letho

02-04-10, 07:44 AM

I'm not certain I understand exactly why you can't proceed with your writing before the threads are judged. If it's a matter of storyline, the story was told and you can move on regardless of the judgment. If it's a matter of spoils, there's no reason not to use them in the subsequent quest even before the judgment is in because by the time that thread is finished, the judgment of the previous one will be done and the spoil approved. Same for the skill a character might acquire in those quests. Liquid time is that awesome.

As for optional judging, this is actually a good proposition. You're not the first person I hear who doesn't care about the scores. We could probably do something about that, though there is always the option of not looking at the judgment. ;)

Kerrigan Muldoon

02-04-10, 07:57 AM

Hidden the rubric? Well, that's a new idea for sure :P. But I'm not in favor, because all the active players already know the rubric and there aren't a lot of new and active players, so it would take months-years for this to work.
Also, the rubric is mend to help new and inexperienced people. It's gives them a relatively good structure to adopt.
Besides, what's so about 'cheating the rubric'? If everyone would do that then everyone would write at least descent. Those who want to cheat usually don't write good, so they'll improve by 'cheating'. Those who do write good usually don't give a shit about the rubric, even though half of them do get massive scores from time to time (and the other half merely average).

Chucklecut

02-04-10, 08:49 AM

In a lot of cases, the Rubric does provide good structure. But it does nothing that a Judge's comments wouldn't do even better. A bigger concern is how it pretty much standardizes the 'ideal' of writing on this site. It's probably a bad thing when I can blank out the names in a thread, pretty much any thread on this site, and have no bloody idea who is writing the specific post. Structure, in this sense of the word, could be substituted with conformity/sameness. And that word is pretty much poison for creative writing. But, as per usual, I digress.

Letho: There's nothing that really stops me, other than the basic question of "If the Judging mod of Thread A doesn't approve the spoil I'm using in Thread B, where does that leave Thread B, and how do I rectify it by Liquid Time?"

And the reason why it would/should be different than just not looking at the score is the whole bitchfest I wrote before I had my coffee and morning cigarette. How fair is it when a person puts forth just as much effort as the next bloke, but gets less out of it because he didn't pretty up his writing to the Judge's satisfaction? Sometimes, a person just wants to write/roleplay, and not have his progress held up by an Imaginary Person's opinion. (Where Imaginary = Random Guy On The Internet.)

Of course, none of this is meant to belittle the Judges' contributions. It's just not always needed.

Slayer of the Rot

02-04-10, 10:00 AM

Because I don't hate myself.

Yeah, that's pretty much it. I already went down that road; it's an intolerable and droll fucking job. I hung in longer as a bazaar mod, and I god damn hate math of any kind. I mean, someone's got to do judging, but you could not pay me to undertake that task again.

Revenant

02-04-10, 11:50 AM

Don't release it to the public. Yeah, it's an almost dictator way of going about it. People can't cater to the rubric if they don't know it.

I’m on the opposite side of the spectrum. I think that it would be better and would cut down on ‘subjective’ judging to have a better defined rubric.

Knowing that I can get up to 10 points in “Setting” is good, but the rather loose description of how to write to setting is what leaves so much room for a judge’s interpretation. One judge gives my submission a 4, but another judge would rate it as a 7 because there is no real solid definition of what exactly a ‘4’ or ‘7’ is.

For example, I’d like to see something like:

Setting: 1-10 points
1: The story takes place in the blank void of timeless space.
2-3: Barest description of the environment. (We arrived on a mountain. We fought there.)
4-5: The environment is somewhat detailed but is not a factor.
6-7: Detailed environment. Minimal impact on the story.
8-9: Detailed environment that is fully integrated into the story.
10: Vibrant, engaging environment that plays a major part in the story.

Does this mean that people will focus more on “writing to the rubric?’ Yes, but a well defined rubric would fit any writing and should enhance any story. And you leave the judge’s ‘wildcard’ vote as a nebulous category to allow for slight personal taste.

This, in my opinion, would get rid of a lot of judging complaints and would make judging easier to grade. Personal feelings like, “the thread is too violent for my tastes” would only need to be addressed in the wild card category, so it would have impact, but not overwhelming impact, on how a thread is graded.

If you wanted, you could even use the full fleshed out rubric as a “beginner’s” rubric. When submitting a thread, the writer could specify if they want the more defined beginner rubric or the old style nebulous rubric. Have lesser amounts of XP generated for using the beginner rubric. Less risk, less reward.

Christoph

02-04-10, 12:05 PM

I have a mutli-part solution to make the site generally better for everyone. Naturally, some of the issues, such as character restrictions, can’t really be messed with without fundamentally changing ‘the game’ aspect of Althanas, so I’ll leave those be.

Changes are listed in order from easiest to most difficult to implement.

1.) I’ve heard it said before, including in this thread: make judgments optional. That way, Althanas could please those who just want to play it as a game as well as those here to write, without hindering the experience provided for either group. Furthermore, it would take some strain off the judges and let them focus on threads written by those who are here to write. Just come up with a static reward formula that does not have a Score Variable. It should take… all of five minutes?

2.) Change the length requirements for quests and battles. So long as a thread is a complete story, or at least a complete serial installment, it is no less deserving of a judgment and some rewards. This would make things a bit easier on the judges, as no longer would practically every single thread be novelette length or longer. It would facilitate growth in writers, as they would no longer feel the need to pad their writing needlessly (not that there is anything fundamentally wrong with a more verbose style if done properly and for the right reasons, as opposed to just for the sake of making posts and threads longer). Some reworking of the EXP formula may be necessary, so that the EXP-per-post remains more constant between short threads and long ones, but other than that this would be easy to implement and there’s really no reason not to.

3.) Do what Revenant suggested: post a well-defined rubric, like Ataraxis and I did at the onset of the ToC (feel free to use that very post as a starting point if you’d like, as it’s still there (http://www.althanas.com/world/showthread.php?t=17630)). While judges will always be subjective, it would at least even the numbers gap, ensuring that “Good” is the same number for all judges, even if different judges have different opinions on what is “good”.

4.) Breathe new life into the Writing Workshop. Honestly, if the WW was in full swing and really worked, Althanas probably wouldn’t need judges (not that I’m proposing that we get rid of judges). There are a few ways to accomplish this; either award some EXP to members who give reviews, or perhaps require that any member wishing to submit a thread to the Workshop review one or two other threads him/herself.

5.) Hold judges to higher standards, or at least give them much more training BEFORE sending them to work. Couple this with increased accountability, or any accountability, really. I have been told by judges, who will remain unnamed, that they literally have just skimmed through threads and applied arbitrary numbers and lackluster (if any) comments. Even if the members request numbers-only, there is never a right time to skim an entire thread. There needs to be more accountability to ensure that this doesn’t happen in the future. There are ways to accomplish this, though that discussion would need its own thread.

Logan

02-04-10, 01:14 PM

Just like with character profiles, nobody writes the same way.

What might be easy for you to define as a 10 in setting, may not actually fit what setting is intended for.

When I judged, I didn't just reflect the environment in Setting, I actually incorporated use of the environment and also unique ways of looking at it, that would not be given fair scoring by a standardized set of defined rules.

There can NEVER be a standard "this is a 10" mentality. Ever. Nobody will ever on the forum arrive at a perfect 100.

However, I have read pieces that received high marks and deserved far lower.

The rubric does need to be rethought and redfined, but not so strictly. Perhaps examples, such as an actually worthy JC, would show what constitutes a high-scoring caliber thread.

I do agree it would benefit us all greatly to have all the judges on similar scales, and that is being worked on. Thanks to Duffy, we're already hammering out some great ideas, and once they are ready to be viewed, they'll be posted. All of it coming because of your commitment to discussion.

So thank you.

Revenant

02-04-10, 01:38 PM

Stuffs and things.

My example was pretty much just a quick blurb to get my point across. As you said, people have different writing styles and nothing could possibly cover all of them.

I think the idea of putting something up saying "This is an example of grade 3 writing ..." and then "This is an example of grade 7 writing ..." would go a long way towards showing what level of expectation each grade has over what is currently posted.

Thanks for listening!

Logan

02-04-10, 01:46 PM

Revenant

02-04-10, 02:43 PM

And we try to do that by having the Judge's Choice section. Unfortunately, since activity declined, so did the numbers of quality threads achieving such a standard.

I would suggest looking through that section at some of the oldest threads. Those, by far, are some of the best.

Believe me, I've really enjoyed reading through the Judge's Choice selections. But not everyone who joins up has the time or inclination to do so. That's why I suggested putting a couple of lines up for each catergory of the rubric.

Alternately, you could post a link to the judge's choice stories in the rubric section saying "look at these great examples." I didn't know the judge's choice bloc even existed until I stumbled upon it.

Amaril Torrun

02-04-10, 03:41 PM

For example, I’d like to see something like:

Setting: 1-10 points
1: The story takes place in the blank void of timeless space.
2-3: Barest description of the environment. (We arrived on a mountain. We fought there.)
4-5: The environment is somewhat detailed but is not a factor.
6-7: Detailed environment. Minimal impact on the story.
8-9: Detailed environment that is fully integrated into the story.
10: Vibrant, engaging environment that plays a major part in the story.

This is actually how the rubric is supposed to work, though each judge would have slightly differing views. While I try to say things like the above in my commentary, I try to put more of an emphasis on specific ideas for how the writing in question can progress into the next level. I guess I had assumed that the above ideas behind the numbers for the rubric was a given.

While there are a lot of good ideas coming from this thread, I'd like to focus on one piece of the discussion personally. How do I improve my own quality as a judge? I am in no way saying that I don't feel qualified, so let's not let this post cause any talk about that. It was already mentioned earlier in this thread, but judges develop their skills over time just as writers do. Therefore, if anyone has any suggestions to help me improve, please talk to me through PMs, not this thread.

I'm just going to throw some quick details that I try to incorporate into my readings, evaluations, etc...

I question myself over everything I write, making sure I'm making the point I want to make.

I review my remarks to make sure I'm not discrediting a piece of writing due to a personal bias toward a particular style.

I really mean it when I ask the writers to PM me with any questions they may have.

I only judge threads when it doesn't feel like a job. I can honestly say I enjoy judging threads and in a non-powertrip kind of way.

I force myself to feel unrushed as I read and critique the current thread in order to not miss things, though missing some things is unavoidable. (An example: Correcting spelling errors that are actually just the UKs version of the word.)

When I'm done, I'll sleep on what I've written to make sure I didn't write anything while in a bad mood.

I give an honest effort to come up with various ways to improve the writer's literary skills, even when their writing is superior to mine in my eyes.

I reread sections that I may have commented on, so as to not try to correct something that isn't wrong.

This isn't everything I keep in mind while working on a thread, but hey, I'm at work and keep getting distracted. I know I'm missing some of the things I wanted to say.

So yeah, send some honest pointers, ideas and suggestions my way through PMs.

Logan

02-04-10, 03:41 PM

Hmm. Good suggestion.

I wonder if we were to explain the rubric using examples of well-written pieces from the JC section, if that would help you think?

Like:

"Example paragraph of JC thread that shows really good dialogue" -- This piece shows one way of producing high quality dialogue in a thread. *Describe what was good*

Thoughts?

EDIT: Aww...Amaril, you don't want my honest opinions out in the open for everyone to see? Lol. Just kidding.

Amaril Torrun

02-04-10, 03:47 PM

Hence me asking for them through PMs. :p

EDIT: Note: If you have something to say that you truly think will help me help other writers, don't be afraid to hurt my feelings.

Logan

02-04-10, 03:58 PM

That red font really brings out the P-M-S...ya know. Maybe another color would've been more appropriate?

Visla Eraclaire

02-04-10, 06:30 PM

Things that were brought up during the unfortunate misunderstanding that gave me a brief respite:

Secret rubric ~ Not a good idea for several reasons, most of which have already been outlined. Let me add one though. There are no secrets on Althanas. Everyone talks, the staff is a revolving door and nothing stays hidden for long. Ultimately it would just be another thing for old members to lord over new members.

Optional judging ~ Actually an interesting idea. If you could progress your character IC to a level that you found interesting without having to get criticism, this might be nice. Better yet, we really could jettison much of the game-based level system in favor of more freedom. That takes a lot of the rewards out of good writing and removes the game-based incentives. That's a lot of what makes people post and what makes Althanas unique. Still, some version of this would likely be a good idea.

Judge inadequacy ~ Look, as much as I gave Duffman a hard time about his writing, I think a lot of the time it isn't that he's terrible, it's that he doesn't care. And let me segue that into a real problem with judging that has nothing to do with writing ability: Apathy. You see a four page monstrosity that you have no background on and have to read it all at once.

I think the workshop could significantly improve this. Give incentives for non-official judges to evaluate and comment on works. It trains people to be "real" judges if we still want them, and lets people who WANT to read a thread evaluate it.

That's the thing. People don't write for everyone. The best judgments are ones from people who have read your writing before and are enjoying what they're reading. Anyone can correct your commas, but I'm not writing for someone who wants a lot of action. By the same token, most members are not writing for me because I'm not a huge fan of bombastic anime-style fights. Writing is in large part about writing to your audience.

Getting away from singular individuals who are judges of all and getting to a place where peer review improves everyone, IC and OOC, would be a big step forward. It would make being on staff more about facilitating things, keeping up activity, and looking at the big picture, and less about drudgery of reading topics that you frankly don't care about. Maybe you could finally fix the burnout/revolving door problem.

Duffy

02-04-10, 06:42 PM

Judge inadequacy ~ Look, as much as I gave Duffman a hard time about his writing, I think a lot of the time it isn't that he's terrible, it's that he doesn't care. And let me segue that into a real problem with judging that has nothing to do with writing ability: Apathy. You see a four page monstrosity that you have no background on and have to read it all at once.

Getting away from singular individuals who are judges of all and getting to a place where peer review improves everyone, IC and OOC, would be a big step forward. It would make being on staff more about facilitating things, keeping up activity, and looking at the big picture, and less about drudgery of reading topics that you frankly don't care about. Maybe you could finally fix the burnout/revolving door problem.

Stop press planet Earth, Duffman AGREES with Visla. With the exception that it's not apathy with judging, I enjoy doing it. It's apathy with writing for an audience, apathy and impatience with editing and proof reading.

With a little bit of encouragement I reckon I've turned a thread from a dive bomb to something workable - and all it took was 2 hours of painstaking comma and sentence structuring...two hours I will never reclaim...

But you don't have to read my writing anymore anyway, even if it does improve :p

Visla Eraclaire

02-04-10, 06:48 PM

Stop press planet Earth, Duffman AGREES with Visla. With the exception that it's not apathy with judging, I enjoy doing it. It's apathy with writing for an audience, apathy and impatience with editing and proof reading.

With a little bit of encouragement I reckon I've turned a thread from a dive bomb to something workable - and all it took was 2 hours of painstaking comma and sentence structuring...two hours I will never reclaim...

But you don't have to read my writing anymore anyway, even if it does improve :p

Oh and for clarification, at the beginning I was talking about your apathy for copy-editing and proofreading. The segue was from that apathy to MY apathy for reading topics, which, for the record is the reason I quit. I felt guilty reading and judging threads that I didn't care about and with how long I'd ignore pending judgments before forcing myself to trudge through them.

Duffy

02-04-10, 06:52 PM

(Point taken :p)

I will leave it there for now, a new rubric outline is being drafted, as well as a finalised workshop proposal and code of conduct to establish better contact between evaluator/judge and the writers.

I'd hate for all this discussion and brainstorming to go to waste, so it's time to decide and facilitate the will of the people! (Etc etc.)

Visla Eraclaire

02-04-10, 06:55 PM

What is the status of workshopped threads in your current proposal? Will they allow the sort of character progression that regular threads do? It seems to be something that people crave. Even people like myself who don't much care for the game aspect of the site like to gain exp because it allows us to bring our characters to the level of power and ability necessary for the stories we wish to tell.

Do seriously consider rewarding evaluators if it isn't already in your proposal. We've shied away from IC incentives for OOC activity for a long time, but I think it's time to at least try it out. There were staff incentives proposed which met with a harsh reception, but I think this sort of thing smacks less of favoritism and oligarchy and more of credit where credit is due.

Aiko

02-04-10, 07:38 PM

I've been reading, and following along, having nothing to say, until an idea came along concerning optional judging and a way to play without judging/reviews.

Make each level require a certain amount of threads to progress to the next level. No judging, no reviews, just complete X threads and your at the next level. Just notate in your last post that you don't want judging. If someone else in the thread wants judging, they can still get judging, this doesn't take away from that. As for how to keep track of how many they've done, why throw away something that already works? Keep using EXP.

Let's take the first two levels for example. From 0 >1 it would take two threads, that's one thousand per thread, to equal the two thousand necessary to reach level 1. To get from 1 > 2, that's an additional 3,000 EXP, thus three more threads. And so develops a pattern, each additional level requires one more thread to reach.

Well, it may not be absolutely flawless, but its a possible method of judge-less playing.

Amaril Torrun

02-04-10, 07:49 PM

To be honest, I'm not really a fan of that idea, but I'll brainstorm it with you nonetheless Aiko. If we were to go that route, I'd suggest 500 exp per thread, since that is the norm for those starting out. Of course this doesn't account for one thread being an epic war of Althanas shattering proportions, as opposed to a thread about Amaril frolicking to the market for a loaf of bread, playing a quick game of whiffleball with some neighborhood kids on the way back home.

Of course, that'd completely change just about everything that I loved about Althanas as well as taking away what makes this site truly unique.

Slavegirl

02-04-10, 07:52 PM

If you do a level per x-number of threads without judging, then do you have a chance of getting extra exp by having your threads judged? What incentive is there for better writing if you can level with really crappy threads so long as you write enough of them? How can we make it fair to everyone?

Visla Eraclaire

02-04-10, 08:03 PM

I think the site has been trying to serve two masters with the same system for too long. If you genuinely want to write well and improve yourself, the leveling system can frequently be a mere constraint and frustration. I want to tell a story about a young woman with certain abilities. I don't care to use these to win silly tournaments or battle other players. Even if I did, being omnipotent would actually give my opponent the advantage in a battle, in my opinion. Writing the helpless little guy has much more dramatic potential. In any event, writing better is the goal, and leveling is merely an obnoxious hoop one must jump through to tell the tales one wants.

On the other hand, some people wish to play the site as a game, writing for fun and gaining levels as a reward, growing their characters in power for its own sake. For these people, judgments are tiresome chores which delay their progress.

Obviously there is some blending between these groups, but this has been a core problem for the site for some time. Leveling without judgment creates "imbalance" but in what sense? There may come a time when character power is limited only by reason and the consent of your co-writers. Judgment and evaluation could merely be for their own sake, for improving for those who care, or as a measure of prestige and time spent on the site. Perhaps some rewards, but not a yoke that restrains new members from being anything but mewling children compared to the deific creatures that long time players are.

It's a complex situation and likely one that requires its own topic and careful consideration. Still, simply the ability to be peer-judged rather than officially judged OR to gain experience from evaluating others to accelerate one's character growth could solve a great deal of these issues without having to abandon what has been the backbone of Althanas since its inception.

Finally: A specific response to Amaril. Experience already fails to accurately represent actual experience gained by your character. It's already an abstract construct. I understand your concerns, and I think I've partly addressed them, but this should not be among them. At present, I can gain more experience having a well-written chat with someone than I can slaughtering an entire demonic army.

In short, EXP is already OOC.

Amaril Torrun

02-04-10, 08:35 PM

Good point though I think I went with the wrong comparison as well. Slavegirl said it better than I. Making end of thread evaluations mean nothing toward character advancement would cause people to put forth less effort to achieve the same goal. A lot of the writing on Althanas would devolve rather than show improvement.

EDIT: I'm at the end of my 16 hour shift though, so I think I may be getting my ideas about the site crossed. I'll get back to this tomorrow after I do some actual evaluating of the current thread I'm reading, since long waits are a part of the problem.

Visla Eraclaire

02-04-10, 08:40 PM

That's that status quo. The sort of people who would do that are already grinding threads and ignoring judgments. It's slightly less blatant, but it is there.

I think a radical no-judgment advancement is likely not necessary if the workshop peer evaluation can be implemented and streamlined to that evaluator and writer both gain rewards. Those who wish to advance quickly could provide feedback to hasten it or join with likeminded individuals to give comments. Obviously there could be collusion, but it would be fairly obvious and I would hope that people wouldn't be so petty as to cheat at a game for which there is no point in victory.

I think we cling to the idea of exp for the wrong reasons. Yes, it is what makes Althanas unique to a degree. It does keep new characters under control. But given how our battles run by consent and are judged on writing quality, I think we fear "overpowered" characters more than we ought to. What we should fear is characters whose power ruins stories and leaves them boring. And their blandness is its own punishment.

Logan

02-04-10, 08:43 PM

This site will always be split over those very things.

Visla Eraclaire

02-04-10, 08:46 PM

This site will always be split over those very things.

How defeatist. Even if that is so, and we refuse to serve them separately, there are ways to serve both better if we are willing to let go of some of the cruft of our system.

Logan

02-04-10, 08:49 PM

I wasn't disagreeing. In fact, I agree. I was just stating that the site will always be split over what you were saying.

You have the gamers.

You have the story tellers.

You have your mixtures of both.

You have Althanas. lol.

Max Dirks

02-04-10, 09:16 PM

Civilized Savagery

02-05-10, 02:04 AM

There's a lot of interesting stuff going on in here. One thing that just seems foolish to me is the continuous assertion that someone must be a good writer to be a good critic (judge, whatever). That's just not true. People who can't write read all the time, and they can make perfectly valid assessments of the book's writing. Just because they can't do better doesn't mean they don't know what they're talking about. Sure, the two skills are related, but the actual processes are totally different. Coaches can't play professionally, do you think they shouldn't be telling the players how to play? Art critics usually aren't artists, movie critics don't make movies. Very few professional editors are writers, and without them many of the most excellent books out there would be garbage. Personally I know I've gotten some very good advice from people whose work I wouldn't want to read.

I think saying the judges need more training or accountability is certainly a reasonable topic, but saying someone else's judgment isn't valid because you think you're a better artist than them is something people have been doing forever, but the fact is it's a completely different job, and writers need people with more perspective than them to evaluate their work.

I thought optional judging was an excellent idea, but it actually seems that that system is essentially already in place, and I at least certainly didn't know about it (granted, I'm new here, but I'm not new to the idea).

For my too sense on the judging/no judging angle... I've been to at least half a dozen play by post sites, and I strongly prefer althanas' judging scheme, just because it does create a framework that you can somewhat rely on. To be honest it's a bit of a mixed bag, because I can find it really frustrating when I have some excellent character and story ideas that I know I'll literally never be able to use because trimming the character down to level zero would destroy everything that makes them interesting. At the same time, it's ridiculously discouraging as a player having to constantly and chaotically deal with people of completely different writing goals and styles, often with literally now grammar (I remember once trying to participate in a thread where 3 people were actively engaged in serious writing and roleplaying while one other simply did whatever he wanted and effectively gutted the thread on a whim).

For what it's worth, I do fall between the people like the game and people who just want to write. I don't really care what my score is, but at the same time it's kind of fun, and I like seeing what other people think of my writing.

There may have been some other points I wanted to comment on, but I can't remember and this is quite long enough already =P

Visla Eraclaire

02-05-10, 08:42 AM

I'd like to point out that you currently have 4 options for judging. You can request a full out evaluation using the full rubric, a brief evaluation using the full rubric, a shortened version of the rubric--utilizing only Story, Character, Writing and Wildcard--, or the Writer's Workshop. In my opinion, these options cater nicely to the super majority of the players on the site. I just think that the options are under used because people don't know they exist. This, of course, is no one's fault. It's because of the scripting error we're having with our actual judgment submission form (which I'm working on fixing). When it's done it'll force you to choose what type of judgment you want.

The ultrashort version of the rubric is nice for some. I think people who genuinely want no evaluation whatsoever already have sort of an option there. Though judging one of those threads still takes time. The actual judging takes about 5% or less of the time it took me to judge a thread. The only way to really shorten the turnaround on threads was to have already been reading them from the start, or to be familiar with the writer enough to read at a good clip.

That's another thing. Though it might cause problems and it hurts when it comes to some people's style of writing things and then going back to proof them, having someone attached to a thread as you write it would be helpful. Might be something to consider. It's not for every thread or every writer, but if you're going to write something over the course of a reasonable time, a couple weeks or something, having a judge reading it as you go and maybe even providing continuous feedback could get you somewhere.

Here's the thing though, that's really the sort of thing you'd want to ask a friend to do... it's kind of a big imposition and the person has to care about it. That's why I think getting this peer review situation could really help writers who want more out of judgments and help judges focus on those who just want feedback from a decent writer, not a personal critique.

Zook Murnig

02-05-10, 10:33 AM

On the note of a "new" rubric, let me make it plain that nothing has been decided, including whether we even need a new rubric. Duffy appears to have gotten a little over-excited on that topic, as it is being discussed at length amongst the moderators and administrators. I will say that the alternative that I have been gunning for is to keep the current rubric, but work on judge understanding of how it works, and how to use it.

The current rubric is, I feel, a very interesting and useful tool, and far better than any other rubric I've seen on other sites. A shift in one category can, and will, affect several others, and every detail has its place. Nothing is considered to significantly outweigh anything else, and it emphasizes storytelling tempered with good use of literary devices and grammar for easy, and enjoyable, reading.

On the note of evaluation-free advancement, I feel it would be best if it were less of a static reward (eg. 500 EXP per thread, or X threads to level), and more of using the current XP calculations, but just using a static relatively low score (about 40 or so) so as to allow for this option, without making it inherently preferable to full evaluation. This will decrease the workload for judges and increase turnaround among those players who prefer not to deal with evaluations. If such players feel that a work of theirs is particularly exemplary, they are still free to submit it for evaluation, and are in fact encouraged to do so, as their rewards will stand a chance of being increased significantly.

And as far as EXP incentives, I have always been in favor of this, though I realize it smacks of the Good Ol' Boys Club saying "We think we're doing such a good job, we're gonna give ourselves a raise." However, I think offering EXP incentives for player options, like the Writers' Workshop, will take the bad taste out of it, or at least the edge off. When someone submits their thread for the Workshop, and several people comment on it, the judge that finally goes through and posts the end evaluation and EXP will determine which comments were useful, and which were "derhurp, that was good." Useful comments will earn a small reward (relative to the level of the commentator and quality of the comment) and less than useful comments get nothing.

Visla Eraclaire

02-05-10, 10:50 AM

Zook's on staff again? And already acting as a mouthpiece for how things ought to be going with a very officious tone. Amusing as always.

Let Duffy get over-excited, I say. It's better than the endless indecisive drudgery of "discussing it among the staff." Things that get discussed at length die, or only emerge as some sanitized and bland version of the good ideas they once were.

Frankly, as much as the manner in which it was presented displeases me, Zook's comments are mostly good. I'll focus on the workshop, because that is where I disagree most and also the place where I think the most change is needed and the most good can be done.

Rather than putting a flat low score on threads that don't get 'official staff evaluation' I think you should let peers designate it. There's the possibility of favoritism but being watchful for collusion is easier than reading every thread and evaluating it anyway. It's still less of a drain on staff resources.

Rather than having peers go through the whole rubric, they're required to give a certain amount of commentary and a general evaluation. Levels that everyone can understand without dwelling on it too much, like a letter grading scale that most schoolchildren are familiar with, or something similar. The evaluator posts to say they're going to review the thread, the writer consents (I think a necessary step, but one that should be watched for abuse), the reader has a certain amount of time to get through it. If they post within the time with the amount of comments, they are rewarded. The writer is rewarded based on the grade they got. Very simple. More commenters can also get rewarded for reviewing, though, for simplicity, only the first review counts for the writer. There should be a limit to how many commenters can receive credit simply so people do not trudge through the archives trolling for exp.

The grades should have some impact on EXP but not a huge one so as not to make them too important for leveling purposes. The bigger a deal they are in that sense, the more incentive there is for abuse. Making them simply a shorthand evaluation is best.

Duffy

02-05-10, 10:53 AM

I'd motion for a more degree based grade bracket.

0-40, 40-50, 60-70, 70-80 and 80+ being JC worthy outstanding level.

Visla Eraclaire

02-05-10, 11:09 AM

That's basically what I'm saying, you just don't put the numbers on there because without an attachment to the rubric, they're meaningless.

Let people give grades of A-D or "Excellent" to "Poor" which are much easier to understand. Do the numerical calculations on the back end and let people deal with familiar ways of evaluating.

Most of their evaluation will be via written comments and suggestions which will be more helpful to some than the rigid rubric judgments. Rather than trying to fit the writing into the various slots of the rubric, peer commenters will simply look at it for what it is and give suggestions on how it could be better. These comments would be mandatory to receive commenter rewards.

Obviously the old rubric and judging system remains for the time being. Let people see what they like and have options. A few people will try the new system and if it's successful it can be expanded. In the meantime, this lets judges have a few less threads to read so they can focus on training and consistency in rubric application.

Twylith

02-05-10, 11:11 AM

I think we cling to the idea of exp for the wrong reasons. Yes, it is what makes Althanas unique to a degree. It does keep new characters under control. But given how our battles run by consent and are judged on writing quality, I think we fear "overpowered" characters more than we ought to. What we should fear is characters whose power ruins stories and leaves them boring. And their blandness is its own punishment.

[ lie ]

I read the rest of this thread, I promise.

[ /lie ]

But really, this comment in particular stood out to me. It's one of the things that bothers me most about Althanas. The fear of "omg don't powergame!" It's one of the first things a judge said to me on this site, after a bit of an arguement over whether or not my character could fly short distances or "hover for 30 seconds".

If our goal is to become better writers, what in the hell does it matter if my character can fly or hover? If our goal is to write truthfully and realistically, would I write my character flying over whole nations? I think not. I think more faith needs to be placed in the writer. If they step over the line, then dock them points. But why keep someone from writing a beautiful bit of prose with a character soaring through the air (not to say that I'd have written it beautifully, but hey, someone could) just because it's "overpowered".

Visla Eraclaire

02-05-10, 11:15 AM

But really, this comment in particular stood out to me. It's one of the things that bothers me most about Althanas. The fear of "omg don't powergame!" It's one of the first things a judge said to me on this site, after a bit of an arguement over whether or not my character could fly short distances or "hover for 30 seconds".

If our goal is to become better writers, what in the hell does it matter if my character can fly or hover? If our goal is to write truthfully and realistically, would I write my character flying over whole nations? I think not. I think more faith needs to be placed in the writer. If they step over the line, then dock them points. But why keep someone from writing a beautiful bit of prose with a character soaring through the air (not to say that I'd have written it beautifully, but hey, someone could) just because it's "overpowered".

This is an attitude held by a significant group of members. Writers just want to write. I'm with you, Twylith, and there are plenty of us. Unfortunately, as part of being on the site we coexist with people who want to play this as a game. There's a little more discussion of this in the rest of the thread (if you feel like reading it ;))

I think some of the changes I'm proposing could make the game more fun and fast-paced for the gamers while allowing those of us who are here to write to do so with increased freedom, less hindered by the restraints of an arbitrary level.

After all, if I want to tell the tale of a powerful hero, I'm stuck telling stories about his early years dawdling about and his training. Sometimes these stories are interesting, and sometimes they're not. Not every hero's tale goes in this kind of bland power-gaining order. It's just one option, and not a very exciting one.

Saxon

02-05-10, 02:14 PM

I stand by my original statement of judging and judges.

I'm intrigued about the peer review of the workshop, though, and would probably use it if it were improved and members were given incentive to use it.

Godhand

02-05-10, 03:42 PM

Visla Eraclaire

02-05-10, 04:02 PM

Sure is semantics in here. Anyone without a goddamn hole in their head can understand that a score of nine is excellent and a score of three is poor.

But should everyone be forced to distinguish between a 57 and a 58? My point isn't "People are so stupid they can only understand simple categories." My point is that we have a scale of evaluation that is too granular. There aren't a hundred meaningful levels of quality for writing.

People are grouping the scores in their heads after the fact, there's no reason for peer critics to bother with taking their impression of "Good" converting it into a number and then having the person read it convert it back to "Good" in their head.

Written commentary is where their effort should be going, not mathematical nitpicking.

NOTE: This is not a criticism of the rubric as it stands. There are reasons that it is such a scale, but we have enough trouble with judges using it properly. If peer evaluation is going to happen, it should happen according to a more straightforward scale.

Now then, if you're done gnawing on the crust of my proposal, maybe we can continue discussing its substance.