Yahoo Forum Archive

Hi, I'm starting to review entries, and noticed something unusual
about the categorization of Gwynnyd's drabble, "A Long Awaited Party"
(#1298). It's listed under Drabble: True Drabble, but it has 111
words. I recognize the challenge that it was written for, having
entered a 111-word drabble into that one myself, but I thought we had
decided to list only 100-word drabbles as True Drabble?

I had reclassified mine as a Ficlet, rather than a drabble... If
Gwynnyd's is a true drabble, then I made a mistake in the category for
mine.

*Sigh* Sorry to not notice such things until Voting Season, and to
make trouble for everyone (especially Gwynnyd)..... I'm trying to get
involved again, after a nudge from Sulriel.... ;-)

- Barbara

Hi Barbara,

On 21 Aug 2005, at 20:27, Elena Tiriel wrote:

> Hi, I'm starting to review entries, and noticed something unusual
> about the categorization of Gwynnyd's drabble, "A Long Awaited Party"
> (#1298). It's listed under Drabble: True Drabble, but it has 111
> words.  I recognize the challenge that it was written for, having
> entered a 111-word drabble into that one myself, but I thought we had
> decided to list only 100-word drabbles as True Drabble?
>
> I had reclassified mine as a Ficlet, rather than a drabble... If
> Gwynnyd's is a true drabble, then I made a mistake in the category for
> mine.
>
> *Sigh* Sorry to not notice such things until Voting Season, and to
> make trouble for everyone (especially Gwynnyd)..... I'm trying to get
> involved again, after a nudge from Sulriel.... ;-)
>
> - Barbara
>

Let me give you two answers: the ideal one and the practical one. :-)

Ideal: a drabble is 100 words. Period. Double drabbles (200 words),
triple drabbles (300 words), and other ficlets of various lengths are
just that, ficlets. So if we had caught this back in March or April we
would not have put it in the drabble category. The drabble series
contains only drabbles of exactly 100 words, or series of 100-word
drabbles.

Practical: At this point in the awards I don't think we ant to shuffle
around categories. The one exception to that is incompletes, but for
all other stories they really should stay where they are at the end of
check-ballot season. So as far as Gwynnyd's ficlet goes, I think we
should leave it in a drabble category. To move it at this point in the
game would cause too much confusion. I suppose we could change its
description from Drabble: True Drabble to Drabble: Ficlet. What do you
think? Would that cause more or less confusion?

And just for the record, I should take the blame for this slip-up. When
I nominated drabbles I was working under an incorrect definition of
drabbles and thought that any ficlet that was written to a certain word
limit (100, 111, 200, 300, etc.) was a drabble. Back in the spring the
staff list decided that only pieces of exactly 100 words (or series of
such pieces) would be put in the drabble subcategories. Unfortunately,
I never got around to checking all the things I had given the drabble
length.

And {{{Barbara}}} - this isn't your fault! Thanks for pointing out the
situation. And good on Sulriel for nudging you. Glad to haveyou more
involved. If you ahve any questions feel free to ask...

To recap: Yes, Gwynnyd's piece is technically a ficlet instead of a
drabble. At this point I think it needs to stay where it is because to
change now would just be too confusing. I'm willing to change the story
information from true drabble to ficlet if people want to, and next
year we'll (I'll) try to be more thorough.

Cheers,
Marta
*****
Si hoc legere scis nimium eruditionis habes


[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

Hi Marta!

Thanks for responding so quickly! I'm perfectly happy to leave this
as is; I just wanted to point out the problem in case it's something
that the PTB thought should be changed.

And, it's not your fault, either! I nominated this one... but you are
right, the drabble definition did change during the nominating
season. My problem is that I expected the authors to update any
information that was inaccurate, and they either didn't notice the
issue, or didn't realize the definitions had changed in mid-stream.
And I stopped paying attention until now.... Ah, well, such is
life....

Thank you, Marta, for so patiently answering all our questions!

- Barbara

On 8/21/05, Marta Layton <melayton@gmail.com> wrote:
> Hi Barbara,
>
> On 21 Aug 2005, at 20:27, Elena Tiriel wrote:
>
> And {{{Barbara}}} - this isn't your fault! Thanks for pointing out the
> situation. And good on Sulriel for nudging you. Glad to haveyou more
> involved. If you ahve any questions feel free to ask...
>
> To recap: Yes, Gwynnyd's piece is technically a ficlet instead of a
> drabble. At this point I think it needs to stay where it is because to
> change now would just be too confusing. I'm willing to change the story
> information from true drabble to ficlet if people want to, and next
> year we'll (I'll) try to be more thorough.
>
> Cheers,
> Marta

Hi Barbara,

On 21 Aug 2005, at 21:08, Elena Tiriel wrote:

> Hi Marta!
>
> Thanks for responding so quickly! 

You catch me when I actually have email open, you get a quick reply. :-D

> I'm perfectly happy to leave this
> as is; I just wanted to point out the problem in case it's something
> that the PTB thought should be changed.
>

Thanks for pointing it out. Ainae may feel differently, but as far as I
am concerned that piece should stay where it is.

But hey, you had no way of knowing that unless you asked the question...

> And, it's not your fault, either!  I nominated this one...

You did? I could have sworn I had, but I guess I didn't. We both
nominated a lot of Gwynnyd's drabbles. ;-) Ah, well, it was certainly
good enough that I thought I had nominated it!

> but you are
> right,  the drabble definition did change during the nominating
> season. 

I think it's always hard to have the definitions change in the course
of nominating season. The problem is that most people make a nomination
(or approve one, if they're the author) on the basis of how they
understand the rules atthat point in time. Very few authors or
nominators will go back to edit story information mid-stream, because
they've moved on to other things. That's why it's so important to have
as little as possible change during nominating season.

Mind you, I agree this rule did need to be clarified. I'm not saying we
were wrong to do that. Just saying that, hopefully as the awards get
older, we'll get more of these issues ironed out and will have to
change less and less, so will have less of these problems.

> My problem is that I expected the authors to update any
> information that was inaccurate, and they either didn't notice the
> issue, or didn't realize the definitions had changed in mid-stream.

That's one thing we learned this year: many authors are shy about
correcting the nominator's information. That's why I hope we have the
author provide more of the information themselves. That way the author
doesn't have to feel like they're *correcting* someone else.

> And I stopped paying attention until now.... Ah, well, such is
> life....
>

Which is allowed. ;-)

> Thank you, Marta, for so patiently answering all our questions!
>

You're welcome. I will try to answer as many questions as I can -- as a
fellow research geek, you'll understand my feeling that education is
the antidote to many of our ills. ;-)

Marta

*****
Si hoc legere scis nimium eruditionis habes


[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]