Yahoo Forum Archive

Don't even know if subject of this email is spelled right. Doesn't matter.

If discussion of this email was suspended, I apologise for opening it again,
but Dwim made a couple good points.

With no pre-screening (I am not advocating pre-screening.) there will likely
be stories entered that make one (or many a) reader roll the eyes, especially
when you allow self-nominating. I know that I wrote a review in a genre I
don't read, for a story I would not have reviewed otherwise, and not because I was
absolutely over-the-moon about that story. But the author showed some promise
in writing in general terms, whether or not having a grasp of Tolkien's work.

If people are self-nominating, that sort of defeats the "nominator write a
review of the story" suggestion.

People might self-nominate because they would like feedback. They might be
relatively new and unheard-of. Heck, I don't know where I'm going with this.
Certainly there are stories in styles or genres that make me shudder, plenty of
them floating out there. I don't know how many were entered in the MEFAs,
frankly, because I didn't have time to read everything. I sort of stuck to gen and
het Hobbits for the most part, and tried in addition to review every drabble
in every category and thus have an introduction to authors and genres I
normally don't brush elbows with.

Is it cliquish, when your time for reading is limited, to read the type of
story you enjoy? Perhaps I am, if you want to call it that, because I tend to
read stories about Hobbits. If an occasional Man or Elf or Dwarf strays into the
story, that's ok with me. But I'm not likely to seek out stories about, say,
the Rohirrim, even though I have read several excellent "takes" on that
culture. And mention of "the Twins" in a story summary makes me shudder, I don't
know just why but it does. There are just not enough hours in the week. If I have
time to read five chapters a week, I'm probably going to spend it on Hobbits.

Is it cliquish to prefer stories that reflect a certain respect for "canon"?
I suppose I might be accused of elitism, but really, as I'm playing in
Tolkien's sandbox, a part of my delight is in just that... the world he created, the
parameters he set, the historical and sociological implications of the world
he lived in. I take no pleasure in setting Middle-earth characters, say, in an
apartment in modern-day New York. But for others who delight in this sort of
exploration, are there not enough kindred spirits to provide them reviews?

It might be perceived as "cliquish" to write feedback giving preference to
those authors you know or whose works you've enjoyed. I made it a point to write
reviews for authors who were new to me. (Bless the drabble category for
introducing me to new stories within the constraints of time!)

But I don't think that the MEFAs deliberately leave anyone out.

I'm not sure that "charity reviews" are the answer. If some painful-to-read
story were submitted by a hopeful author, that author might not welcome a
review that threw them a bone and offered a few suggestions for improvement.

I'm not sure that eliminating "self-nomination" is the answer, either. What
are the pros and cons?

Lin



In a message dated 11/2/2005 8:31:04 AM Pacific Standard Time,
MEFAwards@yahoogroups.com writes:
To put it in blunt, personal terms, I read a lot of stories this time
around--not all, but many. And while I enjoyed many, even most, of
them, I didn't vote--and I *wouldn't* vote--for every single one that
I read. It'd be dishonest if I did.


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

Hello,

I just wanted to say that I agree with this person...*looks at name*...Lin. First, I was a terrible person for these Awards, mostly because I had some traumatic RL problems, which drew me away from all the action.

Lin makes a lot of good points regarding time issues, and I think that often, because the online world is so fast paced, that people often forget just how time consuming this can all be, reading the stories and reviewing. To be honest, I am not nearly as good as she is, when it comes to reading, reviewing and voting. Because of time constraints, I often only read the genre's I like, new stories by author's I already know, and a few "extra" stories just to see what they are like, by new authors and yada yada.

I don't know if that is really cliquish, but I feel the same. I have been told that I don't "review" enough on other groups and sites. The problem is, NOT enough time to read it all, and I might start to read something, find out it is not my thing, and then stop reading--I usually give an author two or three tries. Do people really want reviews of something I don't like? No. If it is a story I do like, and I have a few suggestions--then yes i will review it.

Self-nominating...no comment. I don't do it, but, hey, some people do... no comment on that.

The "charity reviews"...I don't know. I would hope that everyone is striving for improvement, and as long as the review was helpful and the reviewer said WHY they had problems with it, why the hell not? Isn't the purpose of writing and getting reviews to get help? Really, what is the worse that could happen (as long as everyone stays calm and polite)? The author gets some help and accepts it, or they say Thanks, but No Thanks...

Meh.

Bird

BLJean@aol.com wrote:
Don't even know if subject of this email is spelled right. Doesn't matter.

If discussion of this email was suspended, I apologise for opening it again,
but Dwim made a couple good points.

With no pre-screening (I am not advocating pre-screening.) there will likely
be stories entered that make one (or many a) reader roll the eyes, especially
when you allow self-nominating. I know that I wrote a review in a genre I
don't read, for a story I would not have reviewed otherwise, and not because I was
absolutely over-the-moon about that story. But the author showed some promise
in writing in general terms, whether or not having a grasp of Tolkien's work.

If people are self-nominating, that sort of defeats the "nominator write a
review of the story" suggestion.

People might self-nominate because they would like feedback. They might be
relatively new and unheard-of. Heck, I don't know where I'm going with this.
Certainly there are stories in styles or genres that make me shudder, plenty of
them floating out there. I don't know how many were entered in the MEFAs,
frankly, because I didn't have time to read everything. I sort of stuck to gen and
het Hobbits for the most part, and tried in addition to review every drabble
in every category and thus have an introduction to authors and genres I
normally don't brush elbows with.

Is it cliquish, when your time for reading is limited, to read the type of
story you enjoy? Perhaps I am, if you want to call it that, because I tend to
read stories about Hobbits. If an occasional Man or Elf or Dwarf strays into the
story, that's ok with me. But I'm not likely to seek out stories about, say,
the Rohirrim, even though I have read several excellent "takes" on that
culture. And mention of "the Twins" in a story summary makes me shudder, I don't
know just why but it does. There are just not enough hours in the week. If I have
time to read five chapters a week, I'm probably going to spend it on Hobbits.

Is it cliquish to prefer stories that reflect a certain respect for "canon"?
I suppose I might be accused of elitism, but really, as I'm playing in
Tolkien's sandbox, a part of my delight is in just that... the world he created, the
parameters he set, the historical and sociological implications of the world
he lived in. I take no pleasure in setting Middle-earth characters, say, in an
apartment in modern-day New York. But for others who delight in this sort of
exploration, are there not enough kindred spirits to provide them reviews?

It might be perceived as "cliquish" to write feedback giving preference to
those authors you know or whose works you've enjoyed. I made it a point to write
reviews for authors who were new to me. (Bless the drabble category for
introducing me to new stories within the constraints of time!)

But I don't think that the MEFAs deliberately leave anyone out.

I'm not sure that "charity reviews" are the answer. If some painful-to-read
story were submitted by a hopeful author, that author might not welcome a
review that threw them a bone and offered a few suggestions for improvement.

I'm not sure that eliminating "self-nomination" is the answer, either. What
are the pros and cons?

Lin



In a message dated 11/2/2005 8:31:04 AM Pacific Standard Time,
MEFAwards@yahoogroups.com writes:
To put it in blunt, personal terms, I read a lot of stories this time
around--not all, but many. And while I enjoyed many, even most, of
them, I didn't vote--and I *wouldn't* vote--for every single one that
I read. It'd be dishonest if I did.

"And they painted sex scenes on the walls of Pompeii, Because it wouldn't do to forget how to have sex, And having a huge colorful reminder all over the walls of the house makes it pretty easy to remember."

---- Boomer Bible, Book of Romans, Chapter 8:8-10

---------------------------------
Yahoo! FareChase - Search multiple travel sites in one click.

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

Frankly, even big name authors with well known stories can't rely on others
nominating for them.

It just doesn't work, everyone relies on someone else doing the nominating,
and so unless authors can self nominate, many people will never get an entry
in. Plus, authors know which stories they want nominated, and if you
nominate your own stories, it saves the embarrassment which happened to me
last year of asking an author who hates all awards if she minded if I
nominated her story. The answer I got was rude to put it mildly!

I know none of my stories would ever get nominated if I couldn't self
nominate, and I won't use my friends by begging them to nominate for me.

Jillian

>
>Don't even know if subject of this email is spelled right. Doesn't matter.
>
>If discussion of this email was suspended, I apologise for opening it
>again,
>but Dwim made a couple good points.
>
>With no pre-screening (I am not advocating pre-screening.) there will
>likely
>be stories entered that make one (or many a) reader roll the eyes,
>especially
>when you allow self-nominating. I know that I wrote a review in a genre I
>don't read, for a story I would not have reviewed otherwise, and not
>because I was
>absolutely over-the-moon about that story. But the author showed some
>promise
>in writing in general terms, whether or not having a grasp of Tolkien's
>work.
>
>If people are self-nominating, that sort of defeats the "nominator write a
>review of the story" suggestion.
>
>People might self-nominate because they would like feedback. They might be
>relatively new and unheard-of. Heck, I don't know where I'm going with
>this.
>Certainly there are stories in styles or genres that make me shudder,
>plenty of
>them floating out there. I don't know how many were entered in the MEFAs,
>frankly, because I didn't have time to read everything. I sort of stuck to
>gen and
>het Hobbits for the most part, and tried in addition to review every
>drabble
>in every category and thus have an introduction to authors and genres I
>normally don't brush elbows with.
>
>Is it cliquish, when your time for reading is limited, to read the type of
>story you enjoy? Perhaps I am, if you want to call it that, because I tend
>to
>read stories about Hobbits. If an occasional Man or Elf or Dwarf strays
>into the
>story, that's ok with me. But I'm not likely to seek out stories about,
>say,
>the Rohirrim, even though I have read several excellent "takes" on that
>culture. And mention of "the Twins" in a story summary makes me shudder, I
>don't
>know just why but it does. There are just not enough hours in the week. If
>I have
>time to read five chapters a week, I'm probably going to spend it on
>Hobbits.
>
>Is it cliquish to prefer stories that reflect a certain respect for
>"canon"?
>I suppose I might be accused of elitism, but really, as I'm playing in
>Tolkien's sandbox, a part of my delight is in just that... the world he
>created, the
>parameters he set, the historical and sociological implications of the
>world
>he lived in. I take no pleasure in setting Middle-earth characters, say, in
>an
>apartment in modern-day New York. But for others who delight in this sort
>of
>exploration, are there not enough kindred spirits to provide them reviews?
>
>It might be perceived as "cliquish" to write feedback giving preference to
>those authors you know or whose works you've enjoyed. I made it a point to
>write
>reviews for authors who were new to me. (Bless the drabble category for
>introducing me to new stories within the constraints of time!)
>
>But I don't think that the MEFAs deliberately leave anyone out.
>
>I'm not sure that "charity reviews" are the answer. If some painful-to-read
>story were submitted by a hopeful author, that author might not welcome a
>review that threw them a bone and offered a few suggestions for
>improvement.
>
>I'm not sure that eliminating "self-nomination" is the answer, either. What
>are the pros and cons?
>
>Lin
>
>
>
>In a message dated 11/2/2005 8:31:04 AM Pacific Standard Time,
>MEFAwards@yahoogroups.com writes:
>To put it in blunt, personal terms, I read a lot of stories this time
>around--not all, but many. And while I enjoyed many, even most, of
>them, I didn't vote--and I *wouldn't* vote--for every single one that
>I read. It'd be dishonest if I did.
>
>
>[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
>
>
>
>
>
>Yahoo! Groups Links
>
>
>
>
>
>

--- In MEFAwards@yahoogroups.com, "Jillian Baade" <jilba25@h...> wrote:

>> Frankly, even big name authors with well known stories can't rely

on others > nominating for them.

> > It just doesn't work, everyone relies on someone else doing the

nominating, > and so unless authors can self nominate, many people
will never get an entry > in. Plus, authors know which stories they
want nominated, and if you > nominate your own stories, it saves the
embarrassment which happened to me > last year of asking an author who
hates all awards if she minded if I > nominated her story. The answer
I got was rude to put it mildly!>

> I know none of my stories would ever get nominated if I couldn't

self > nominate, and I won't use my friends by begging them to ominate
for me.> > Jillian> > > >

Thank you Jillian, I was feeling a little lonely and starting to
wonder if I should say anything else or not ...

I think that anyone who knows me knows I'm a fan of self-nomination.
I've always self-nominated, and the times I haven't, nothing of mine
has been nominated. I think that some people like my work well
enough, but I'm clearly nobodies favorite. I can live with that, but
I don't feel like it implies my work isn't up to standard. I'd like to
continue to participate as an author as well as a reader/review in
these awards and I don't believe that would be possible without self-
nominations.

Again agreed about knowing your own works, I know the status and
quality of my works, and while I would be flattered if someone
nominated one of my works for something, I personally feel I'm the
best judge of what should run when and where.

Again (and I apologize if I'm stepping on toes, I think I suggested
earlier that this may need to be it's own topic) - but I'd really like
to see some encouragement for self-nominations instead of the
implication that it's some kind of second class. I imagine that there
are a lot of good authors out there that we are missing out on because
of this attitude.

Sulriel

On 11/3/05, Jillian Baade <jilba25@hotmail.com> wrote:

>
> Frankly, even big name authors with well known stories can't rely on
> others
> nominating for them.
>
> It just doesn't work, everyone relies on someone else doing the
> nominating,
> and so unless authors can self nominate, many people will never get an
> entry
> in. Plus, authors know which stories they want nominated, and if you
> nominate your own stories, it saves the embarrassment which happened to me
>
> last year of asking an author who hates all awards if she minded if I
> nominated her story. The answer I got was rude to put it mildly!
>
> I know none of my stories would ever get nominated if I couldn't self
> nominate, and I won't use my friends by begging them to nominate for me.
>
> Jillian

Hi Jillian,
I think that it is a *lot* less cliquish for me to nominate my own stories,
than for me to ask you to nominate my stories and I will nominate yours in
return. I mean, anyone can nominate their own stuff and if we rely on others
to nominate, especially if it's the same groups nominating each other --
well, then you have to be a "part" of that group to be nominated, or else be
scorned as a self-nominator.
Now, I also agree with Rabidsamfan's point that to be nominated should mean
something. If you can just nominate all of your own stories and still be
able to nominate as many other ones as you like, well, being nominated does
come to mean less I guess. But if you only have a certain number of
nominations to spread around, I think even self-nominations mean something.
It means I think a certain story by me is worthy of competing in the awards
- more than the unnominated stories that I won't be able to nominate. In
many ways giving one out of however many nominations to your own work is
more of an honour than giving one out of an unlimited number of nominations
to someone else's. ANd besides with honourable mentions we're recognising a
lot more works out of the nomination pool.
So, bottom line? Don't feel bad about self-nominating. I know I probably
will.
Marta
--
"Our greatest fear is not that we are inadequate. Our greatest fear is that
we are powerful beyond measure. It is our light, not our darkness that most
frightens us. [...] As we let our own light shine, we unconsciously give
other people permission to do the same."

(Nelson Mandela)


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

Hi Marta,

I have to agree completely with your thoughful response. Especially that if
we only have a certain number of nominations per member, we need to think
about each one, whether it be our own or someone else's story!

Frankly, if the MEFA stop self-nomination, I will simply chose not to
participate, rather then pimp myself out begging for someone to nominate my
work for me.

Jillian

> Hi Jillian,
> I think that it is a *lot* less cliquish for me to nominate my own
>stories,
>than for me to ask you to nominate my stories and I will nominate yours in
>return. I mean, anyone can nominate their own stuff and if we rely on
>others
>to nominate, especially if it's the same groups nominating each other --
>well, then you have to be a "part" of that group to be nominated, or else
>be
>scorned as a self-nominator.
> Now, I also agree with Rabidsamfan's point that to be nominated should
>mean
>something. If you can just nominate all of your own stories and still be
>able to nominate as many other ones as you like, well, being nominated does
>come to mean less I guess. But if you only have a certain number of
>nominations to spread around, I think even self-nominations mean something.
>It means I think a certain story by me is worthy of competing in the awards
>- more than the unnominated stories that I won't be able to nominate. In
>many ways giving one out of however many nominations to your own work is
>more of an honour than giving one out of an unlimited number of nominations
>to someone else's. ANd besides with honourable mentions we're recognising a
>lot more works out of the nomination pool.
> So, bottom line? Don't feel bad about self-nominating. I know I probably
>will.
> Marta
>--
>"Our greatest fear is not that we are inadequate. Our greatest fear is that
>we are powerful beyond measure. It is our light, not our darkness that most
>frightens us. [...] As we let our own light shine, we unconsciously give
>other people permission to do the same."
>
>(Nelson Mandela)
>
>
>[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
>
>
>
>
>
>Yahoo! Groups Links
>
>
>
>
>
>
>

Hi Jillian,

> I have to agree completely with your thoughful response. Especially
> that if
> we only have a certain number of nominations per member, we need to
> think
> about each one, whether it be our own or someone else's story!
>

Good! For myself, there will probably be a few of my stories I choose
to nominate if they aren't nominated by others, but I'll also probably
nominate stories by others over my own. :-)

> Frankly, if the MEFA stop self-nomination, I will simply chose not to
> participate, rather then pimp myself out begging for someone to
> nominate my
> work for me.
>

I understand where you're coming from, and if we do completely ban
self-nominations (unlikely as that is) I wouldn't require anyone to
participate. But I do want to be clear about something. I want the
MEFAs to be something that's comfortable for as many people to
participate in as possible. Even Tolkien admitted that in a sizeable
project it was "not possible to please everybody at all points, nor to
please everybody at the same points." So I hope most people will feel
free to join in on these awards, but decisions will be made based on
what's best for the MEFAs, not to try to keep some specific person
involved.

Oh, and I don't think you meant that, Jillian. If you don't feel like
you can participate anymore I hope we can part with no hard feelings.
But I did just want to be clear.

Cheers,
Marta


*****
"Our greatest fear is not that we are inadequate. Our greatest fear is
that we are powerful beyond measure. It is our light, not our darkness
that most frightens us. [...] As we let our own light shine, we
unconsciously give other people permission to do the same."

(Nelson Mandela)

Hi Jillian,

> I have to agree completely with your thoughful response. Especially
> that if
> we only have a certain number of nominations per member, we need to
> think
> about each one, whether it be our own or someone else's story!
>

Good! For myself, there will probably be a few of my stories I choose
to nominate if they aren't nominated by others, but I'll also probably
nominate stories by others over my own. :-)

> Frankly, if the MEFA stop self-nomination, I will simply chose not to
> participate, rather then pimp myself out begging for someone to
> nominate my
> work for me.
>

I understand where you're coming from, and if we do completely ban
self-nominations (unlikely as that is) I wouldn't require anyone to
participate. But I do want to be clear about something. I want the
MEFAs to be something that's comfortable for as many people to
participate in as possible. Even Tolkien admitted that in a sizeable
project it was "not possible to please everybody at all points, nor to
please everybody at the same points." So I hope most people will feel
free to join in on these awards, but decisions will be made based on
what's best for the MEFAs, not to try to keep some specific person
involved.

Oh, and I don't think you meant that, Jillian. If you don't feel like
you can participate anymore I hope we can part with no hard feelings.
But I did just want to be clear.

Cheers,
Marta

>
>Hi Jillian,
>
> > I have to agree completely with your thoughful response. Especially
> > that if
> > we only have a certain number of nominations per member, we need to
> > think
> > about each one, whether it be our own or someone else's story!
> >
>
>Good! For myself, there will probably be a few of my stories I choose
>to nominate if they aren't nominated by others, but I'll also probably
>nominate stories by others over my own. :-)
>
> > Frankly, if the MEFA stop self-nomination, I will simply chose not to
> > participate, rather then pimp myself out begging for someone to
> > nominate my
> > work for me.
> >
>
>I understand where you're coming from, and if we do completely ban
>self-nominations (unlikely as that is) I wouldn't require anyone to
>participate. But I do want to be clear about something. I want the
>MEFAs to be something that's comfortable for as many people to
>participate in as possible. Even Tolkien admitted that in a sizeable
>project it was "not possible to please everybody at all points, nor to
>please everybody at the same points." So I hope most people will feel
>free to join in on these awards, but decisions will be made based on
>what's best for the MEFAs, not to try to keep some specific person
>involved.
>
>Oh, and I don't think you meant that, Jillian. If you don't feel like
>you can participate anymore I hope we can part with no hard feelings.
>But I did just want to be clear.
>
>Cheers,
>Marta
>
>No, I didn't mean I'd leave. What I meant was if I can't self-nominate,
>very likely none of my stories will be nominated by anyone else, and I'm
>not going to go begging people to do it for me. To me, that defeats the
>purpose.

Jillian

>
>
>
>Yahoo! Groups Links
>
>
>
>
>
>