Ratings and MEFA Eligibility

Jun 30, 2012 19:32

Hello everyone,the ( Read more... )

nominations, ratings, admin, schedule, 2012

Leave a comment

rhapsody11 July 1 2012, 00:29:46 UTC
Marta and other admins... can you please please take off the requirement for the authors to write a statement as to why their story landed in the category 5 of any rating? You now have the luxury of having a large ratings panel and in the past this panel has done an excellent job. A very simple instruction to the liaisons can be given that any rating above 4 can be spotted by a liaison to put forward the panel. Let the ratings panel do their excellent job and do not add an extra burden for the authors where the forms are already quite a task as it already is.

I am not asking this for myself since I will not be participating due to personal reasons, but for those authors who do write stories that possibly could fall under the category 5.

Reply

telperion1 July 1 2012, 00:38:09 UTC
Rhapsody, I'm not sure I understand what you're asking, so please bear with me.

Right now, if your story has a "5" in any area I will look to see if it's hosted at one of the archives that let you skip the ratings panel. If it is, I'll go ahead and finalize it. If it's not, then I would email you as the author and ask for a few pieces of information, most importantly the specific scenes that you want the panel to look at. I also give the author the opportunity to explain the context (what's going on before and after a scene), since the panel usually needs to know that. I think I ask for some other things, but those other things aren't really crucial ( ... )

Reply

virtuella July 1 2012, 00:46:59 UTC
This sounds very different from what I read earlier and much more acceptable.

Reply

rhapsody11 July 1 2012, 00:50:08 UTC
No I am not, but the description thing is is exactly what I mean (it's far too late here, sorry about my muddled comment). Can the question be even shortened to just pointing out specific chapters instead of the author having to detail specifically detail material (scenes for example) should be looked at (I do think we're on the same page here right?)? I have some comments on the description field, but I will hold onto that 'till September.

I do believe that if you lessen this, many folks who are upset about this will feel less censored.

Thanks!

Reply

heartofoshun July 1 2012, 00:51:12 UTC
ask for a few pieces of information, most importantly the specific scenes that you want the panel to look at

The one sex scene or the one graphically violent scene in a novel out of context does not define that novel and an explanation by the author or anyone else of why it is necessary to the plot, characterization and artistic effect the author desires cannot be proven without one reading the entire thing and thinking about it. And not just the theoretically most nearly salacious cut from it.

Reply

rhapsody11 July 1 2012, 00:56:11 UTC
no, but if you for example let the rating people read the chapter (or chapters around it for build up), they could weigh it properly against the rest of the written chapters right? Let's say you have 3 adult scenes spread over a 20 chaptered story, you could for example point them to those three chapters and let them run the statistics...

Or is this too simplistic reasoning?

Reply

heartofoshun July 1 2012, 01:23:27 UTC
I think it is too simplistic. I still want to raise the out-of-context warning here. We are human and reading a graphically sexual or violent scene even if it is only 3% of the story has an affect upon one which it might not have in the context of living with the characters and submerged in their world for say 100,000 words.

Reply

rhapsody11 July 1 2012, 12:07:23 UTC

True. Based on what I read below, I would suggest also that an evaluation of the working method of the ratings panel would be useful: lessons learnt, what does work and what doesn't.

Reply

telperion1 July 1 2012, 01:08:02 UTC
Oshun, you may have a valid point that the ratings panel can't adequately judge things based on a scene (even a scene where the author provides some context). The ratings panel has always judged stories on this basis, so the fact that we're doing things this way isn't a change. More to the point, people signed up for the ratings panel not expecting to have to read a long novel quickly.

I'm happy to discuss changing this in September, but it's just not feasible to change it for 2012.

Reply

heartofoshun July 1 2012, 01:24:40 UTC
I always read significantly more than was suggested to me and never found the isolated scenes however presented useful, usually the contrary, which led me to read and read to get a feel for the piece as a whole.

Reply

neumeindil July 1 2012, 02:55:48 UTC
Likewise. I wouldn't want 3 or 4 pages of some of my stories defining them, because I write some pretty F-ed up stuff; I like to give the authors under review a fair reading to see their whole point.

Reply

curiouswombat July 1 2012, 12:44:14 UTC
I am newly come to the ratings panel - and certainly expected to read more than just a few scenes ( ... )

Reply

heartofoshun July 1 2012, 13:31:52 UTC
Your description above is pretty much how I read works for the review panel. There was a time of two when I was unable to fairly consider a work for whatever reason--in which cases, I recused myself. Marta mentioned this could be a problem for a slow reader. I would assert a slow reader is not qualified for the rating panel, where time is critical.

Reply

heartofoshun July 1 2012, 01:37:01 UTC
There is a method here that you should strive to study and remedy in the future. Don't drop a potential bombshell on the membership at the last minute and say, 'fine, we will discuss your point/complaint/suggestion for next year, after the award season.' Minimally, it makes most people with a difference feel disregarded and disenfranchised. Not that it is not your ballgame and we play here at your sufferance, but that you always gave me the impression of wanting to be inclusive and not exclude writers who take their work seriously.

Reply

rhapsody11 July 1 2012, 12:10:17 UTC
That was the benefit of doing the PM right after the awards, in public. Yes it was hectic, but it was out in the open and folks could weigh in if they wanted to. But to post the conclusions of a - behind doors held PM - two weeks prior the start is absolutely too short notice for people to digest. Again, Marta, I have some suggestions about this that I want to discuss in public, but I will wait 'till September.

Reply

elliska July 1 2012, 01:18:10 UTC
I think the confusion with this point (what the author would need to provide if they marked their story a 5) came from the idea that the author of a "5" story was going to have to 'justify' that they wrote 'literature' (whatever that is) rather than 'pr0n' (whatever that is--I don't know how to distinguish them and I don't care--I enjoy both, but that's also why I don't volunteer for the rating panel either. I'd be lousy at the distinctions they have to make ( ... )

Reply


Leave a comment

Up