Yahoo Forum Archive

Hey guys,

The post-mortem for the 2006 Middle-earth Fanfiction Awards is now
over. I'd like to tell you about some important changes.

-------
1. THE SIZE OF SUB-CATEGORIES.

No subcategory will have more than thirteen pieces or less than five,
and we will be aiming for 7-12 stories per subcategory. Last year
subcategories could have up to fifteen pieces. Also, each subcategory
will have at least three authors. That's an increase from the two
authors we required in 2006.

2. WITHDRAWING A STORY.

We didn't have any clear policy on this last year, but it came up
enough that we wanted to discuss it. It was decided that authors can
withdraw a story at any time by contacting
mefasupport(at)gmail(dot)com. However, if an author withdraws a story
after categorization starts the nomination "counts" for purposes of
eligibility. That means that the story can't be nominated again in a
later year (or, if the story is a WIP, it can't be nominated until
complete).

If an author takes a story off the web but would like it to compete we
will change the story URL to a link at our website that explains the
story is taken off the web. If you leave an archive but the story's
still available somewhere else we can change the link for you, you
just have to ask. But that's not a change: we've *always* done this.

3. FAN ART AND BANNERS.

This is a pretty big change. In 2006 there was an award name for each
place in each main category. So if you placed second in main category
Hobbits, sub-category Fixed-Length Ficlet Series, you would get an
award called the "Master of Buckland Award" and a banner that said you
won that award in Hobbits: Fixed-Length Ficlet series.

This year we won't have different names for the awards for different
places. Instead, artists will design banners featuring different
characters, races, time periods, and settings that aren't tied to a
specific category or place. Authors who win first, second, or third
prize will be able to request a certain banner be customized for their
story. (Depending on the number of volunteers, the MEFAs will either
customize the banner for the author or provide instructions for how
the author can do this themselves.)

4. RATINGS AND NC17 STORIES

We developed a set of ratings different from what any other archive
uses. This is because different archives often use the same rating to
mean different things. The ratings we'll be using are set out at
http://www.mefawards.net/ratings_guide.htm .

Stories rated General, Teen, or Mature are eligible; Adult stories are
not.

5. REVIEWER AWARDS

Reviewers will be able to specify in advance how many reviews they
hope to write. If they meet this goal they'll be recognized for this fact.

6. AUTHOR REVIEWS

We will not be having author reviews in 2007.

7. NEGATIVE REVIEWS

Flames can be removed at the authors' request. The administrator will
have to agree that the review is a flame, and the author will lose any
points that would have resulted from this review. Other members beside
the author may report a flame to mefasupport(at)gmail(dot)com, at
which point the administrator will look at the review and (if he or
she thinks the review is a flame) contact the author and ask whether
they would like the review removed.

Constructive criticism is allowed, but the positive should outweigh
the negative.

8. COUNTING FLF WORD LENGTHS

Volunteers are busy people ;^) so they will not count how many words a
fixed-length ficlet has. Authors will verify that a fixed-length
ficlet really has exactly 100, 150, 200, 300, or 400 words by checking
a box on the nomination form. Authors can count the length of their
stories either by running the word counter of their word processor or
by counting by hand.

9. NOMINATION LIMITS

Nomination limits will stay the same. Any member of the MEFAwards
group can nominate up to twenty pieces.
-------

And that's it for major changes. There will also be a few changes to
how things appear on our site, but that's hard to explain in advance.
Besides there should be *some* surprises for next year. ;^)

As for when the 2007 awards will get started, that depends on how easy
it is to make some of these changes work at our website – and how
quickly I manage to get my stuff done. I'm collecting the rules, FAQs,
a list of important date, a run-down of different types of MEFA
volunteers, and other help-type documents into a section of the webpage.

I'm not going to rush into anything, since I want to do this right.
Watch this space for more announcements in the coming weeks.

Marta

Hi Marta!

This looks good! My congratulations to the MEFA volunteers for such a good
year -- the process gets better each time! -- and for the thoughtful
post-mortem.

I do have some feedback on the following item:

<i>8. COUNTING FLF WORD LENGTHS

Volunteers are busy people ;^) so they will not count how many words a
fixed-length ficlet has. Authors will verify that a fixed-length
ficlet really has exactly 100, 150, 200, 300, or 400 words by checking
a box on the nomination form. Authors can count the length of their
stories either by running the word counter of their word processor or
by counting by hand.</i>

First, did you leave out half-drabbles (50 words) on purpose? I remember a
delightful half-drabble series last year (or maybe the year before?) that
surely would belong in a category for FLF series...

Second, I agree that it is completely appropriate that the authors should be
the ones who verify the word count, not the volunteers. However, I'm very
concerned that you seem to encourage authors to rely on the counts provided
by word-processing programs, which are notoriously inaccurate.
Unfortunately, the only accurate counts are done by hand. My results with MS
Word (two different versions) indicate that the count is correct maybe half
the time, and off by 1-3% the rest of the time, even if I remove standalone
punctuation (e.g. dashes), which confuses MS Word.

I'd like to suggest that the rules and the FAQs mention that counts by
word-processing programs may be inaccurate, and a manual count is the only
kind that can be relied upon. That would alert FLF authors to the problem,
and allow them to decide whether it is an issue that they choose to address
or not.

- Barbara


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

--- In MEFAwards@yahoogroups.com, "Elena Tiriel" <ElenaTiriel@...> wrote:

>
> Hi Marta!
> Hi Barbara,

> This looks good! My congratulations to the MEFA volunteers for such

a good

> year -- the process gets better each time! -- and for the thoughtful
> post-mortem.
>

Thanks! :-)

> First, did you leave out half-drabbles (50 words) on purpose? I

remember a

> delightful half-drabble series last year (or maybe the year before?)

that

> surely would belong in a category for FLF series...
>

I honestly didn't think about it. I do remember that series, but
half-drabbles seem rarer which is why we probably didn't think to
include that length.

But I've become quite Entish in my approach to change ;-) and so I
want to check with the group that did the post-mortem. I've asked them
for their thoughts on this, and will post back once we've talked it over.

> Second, I agree that it is completely appropriate that the authors

should be

> the ones who verify the word count, not the volunteers. However, I'm

very

> concerned that you seem to encourage authors to rely on the counts

provided

> by word-processing programs, which are notoriously inaccurate.
> Unfortunately, the only accurate counts are done by hand. My results

with MS

> Word (two different versions) indicate that the count is correct

maybe half

> the time, and off by 1-3% the rest of the time, even if I remove

standalone

> punctuation (e.g. dashes), which confuses MS Word.
>

I wasn't trying to encourage authors one way or the other. I share
your penchant for accuracy here, and I personally count my drabbles by
hand (*though I've noticed my hand-(mis)counts can often be 1-3% off
at least half the time as well...*). So why accept automated counts at
all? Because authors aren't writing for the MEFAs, and it seems unfair
to ask authors to rewrite for these awards. An awful lot of the
drabble-writers - at least those participating in the discussion -
have always relied on automated word counts. And while I wouldn't do
that for my own drabbles, I don't want to exclude so many people.

There is the added consideration that what makes good FLFs special is
that they don't feel too rushed or like an extra word's been added to
them - the "every word counts" phenomena. If I write a drabble and use
an automated word counter which says what I've written has 99 words,
then I know I need to add one. So I find that perfect place and do
just that. If my word count is off and I originally had 98 words when
it said I had 99, I still met the challenge of seeing where I could
add a word without it feeling superfluous. So while it may not have
exactly 100 words, it still seems appropriate to let this compete with
the FLFs because it has more in common with a true drabble than it
does with other types of writing.

All that said, I understand where you're coming from and I do want to
be as accurate as possible in our descriptions. I just think that
forcing all those authors to count their FLFs by hand and make the
necessary changes so long after they wrote the FLF is going to be more
trouble than it's worth. But you make a good suggestion when you say:

> I'd like to suggest that the rules and the FAQs mention that counts by
> word-processing programs may be inaccurate, and a manual count is

the only

> kind that can be relied upon. That would alert FLF authors to the

problem,

> and allow them to decide whether it is an issue that they choose to

address

> or not.
>

The rules are the wrong place for this sort of thing. I'm trying to
keep them clear of suggestions so an author or whomever can clearly
see "this is what I can do, and this is what I cannot do". But an FAQ
on this issue is a really good idea.

Would you like to write one up? If so, I'd be glad to include it. If
you'd rather not I'll try to write something myself - I just can't
promise it will happen, my own time being limited.

Marta