I change my vote to You Just Got Served, to break the tie, then.

@ RM

I'm going to give it another week and see if I get any more responses with some more posts in the OT about it.

I agree though. I actually found the RG through the RM, which I found a tag for on a review of someone I was reviewing. So it is a good idea. However, I don't think we can make people do that... lol. But if people wanted to mention the RM in random reviews they leave anyway that would be awesome of them.

The only other thing is to make the RM tag in the RM more specific. Like you have to say "Check out the RM" or something rather then just RM link in my profile. Since that may mean nothing to someone. But I dunno how people would feel about that.

RM

Survey Results

-The specific date and length of time seems to be a big issue.

-It seems one person doesn't know the new rules because they oppossed the fact that the losers had to review, which isn't true anymore...

-There were a few comments about having the RM during the week sometime.

-Lack of time to do reviews was another issue.

-One person mentioned that it seemed like an advertisement for the RG which is offputting.

-The concept of the RM, the rules, the mass reviewing, lack of reviews for participating or winning were not a problem for survey takers, BUT changing the reward for winning or participating was rated as something that would make people more likely to participate.

So now... where to go from here... lol. My one thought is to make the RM a weeklong thing? That would make it different days and a longer timespan. I don't know if anyone else has any ideas on that.The only other thing to maybe change is the reward system, but I don't have any ideas there...

Pretty much my only issue with participating with the RM is the time. I work full time, and in January I will be going to school full time as well. I work in retail so I just don't have the time to sit and review as many stories as I want in just one weekend. If it was spread out over a week I could definitely participate more often, or maybe if it happened more then once a month there would be more chances that I would be able to make time for it.

I think perhaps advertising within the RG might be helpful too since it seems perhaps my posts had an effect since we ahve more participants registered for November than we did in the past 2... lol

I agree that advertising in the RG is a good idea. I usually intend to do the RM but I don't always notice when the news is updated to register for it. The reminders in the OT were really helpful in that sense: I kept a closer eye on the RM thread.

Well that's why I post in News, but I think people forget to subscribe to that topic so maybe other posts would be helpful.

I suggested, I think, that maybe it be drawn out for an entire week. So a Monday-Sunday. I don't see why that would hurt and it would allow people like Kim to maybe have more time to do reviews instead of just the weekend. Was there a big problem with that?

I think a week long RM would be great. Definitely would give participants more time, and for people who've been meaning to review certain lengthier pieces for a while, it'd give them a more reasonable amount of time to review-it-up.

I think a quick advertisement in the review is fine, the only problem I have is the required link on the profile deal. I'm a bit obsessive about my profile and how it's set up, and a fourth link makes it unbalanced and thus gives me the willies. The last time I participated in RM, I said something like, "This review courtesy of The Review Game's Review Marathon." Short. Sweet. Simple. I have a link for WCC up that says right beside it "Monthly competition hosted by The Review Game" so if people are smart enough, I don't think they'd have a problem navigating themselves to RG and thus find the RM thread.

It might even been nice to have two RMs a month. One during the week and one on a weekend. Just a thought.

It might even been nice to have two RMs a month. One during the week and one on a weekend. Just a thought.

I second that! I love reviewing, so having two chances a month to sign up for the RM would increase my chances of actually being able to participate. haha.

It might even been nice to have two RMs a month. One during the week and one on a weekend. Just a thought.

If we did that, how would the rewards work? Would there be one review squad looking over both RMs and judging them after both are done? Or would we have two review squads?

I'm not a big fan of RMs a month because it would be hard since we have people pick the date to make sure they were far enough apart that posts didn't overlap. But perhaps an every other month system? One month weekends and the next month a week?

What about the just extend it to a week idea?

Really, I think that would be a nice idea. I don't really like the idea of having it twice a month either--I mean hardly anyone signs up anyway, and once the hype dies down about changing the stuff it might risk going down in participation again and then it would just be ...meh to have 2 of them a month.

Just once a month, as it is, not the 1st week of the month because of WCC, or we could just vote like we do every time already, and then just Monday-Sunday...

@Secret Santa -

Are we going to do this again? I remember doing it two years ago, but I wasn't around last year. If it's up for debate, I vote yes, because that was awesome!

Also, unrelated OT: I love the forum description right now XD

I could go for Secret Santa again. :P

Dude, how does that work? I wasn't here for SS last year, just wondering how that all went down. :3

From what I remember, there was a period of time where people signed up. The person in charge (Frac, as I recall) drew names from a hat and PMed everyone about who they had to review and everyone reviewed that person as anon. Then there was a period where people got to guess who they had, and there might have been another review if they guessed right.

Dude, that sounds like fun. I'd totally be down if we had one this year.

@Secret Santa

Ooh, that sounds awesome. I'm up for it!

I'd be down with it too! I'd even be willing to organize it too, since Frac's lappy is out for the count. :D

I agree, Secret Santa sounds awesome. :)

I like the idea too and I would also be willing to do all the legwork. My guess is Frac saved the original rules or at least knows where they are because I vaguely think you were allowed to put a preference as to what you like to review and also what you normally write so people could be matched up like that, but I could be totally wrong.

Yeah I should have that old post around somewhere.

Lemme check the forum a bit to see where it is.

SECRET SANTA

previous rules etc

If you want to change any rules, now would be the time to make your opinion heard, otherwise I'll just assume you want a copy-paste procedure.

When registrations ends, I will put all names in a hat, and leave it to chance on who gets who (but be at least a tad sensitive to the restrictions you made. But I will not coddle you.).

What does that mean, "The restrictions you made" part?

Other than that, everything seems pretty straightforward and I'll definitely be registering when you post this year's SS. :D

Edit: Nevermind about my question. It just clicked. XD (Recently woke up and still haven't finished my coffee. Cut me some slack. Ha-ha).

I'd be down with it too! I'd even be willing to organize it too, since Frac's lappy is out for the count. :D

Pfft, don't be speaking badly about my sunshine. I got a new one. She's fierce. Look at her shine. All black and sleek. Rawr.

What does that mean, "The restrictions you made" part?

Just to clarify in case others are going to be as confused too - you can state in your registration post if there are certain pieces you do not want to review (ie, poetry, slash, lots of gore, whatever makes your knees weak). So that'd be a restriction on what you'd be willing to review.

My only question is was their a penalty or something for someone who registered, but did not participate?

There was some discussion later on in the registration posts about stating if someone had already reviewed your piece. You said that if a participant had reviewed all your pieces to edit that into your post so you know and there was some dissent about the fact that since it's an anon review people can just re-review. I think that re-reviewing shouldn't be allowed and if someone has reviewed all your pieces you must say so or risk not being able to be given a review. But we should probably make a specific rule about this and put it in the first post.

Also, if you don't accept PMs your e-mail should be in your registration post. Or should be PMed to Frac.

Also, in the first post should be if you edit your post tell Frac 'cause she won't get an alert (you made that in a post during registration)

Also, I would say that once people start getting reviews they are allowed to speculate as to who gave them, but no one can say who they actually gave a review to. They can bluff though and say they didn't give a certain review.

My only question is was their a penalty or something for someone who registered, but did not participate?

Temporarily banned til they do it, then? Cuz they will get a review out of it, so it's only fair really.

I think that re-reviewing shouldn't be allowed and if someone has reviewed all your pieces you must say so or risk not being able to be given a review. But we should probably make a specific rule about this and put it in the first post.

I agree. I don't think re-reviewing counts and so it should be stated if someone has reviewed all your work/the work you want reviewed. However, if they don't state it, then I guess that means they are OK with being re-reviewed, which in that case: their choice I guess.

The rest I agree with.

Also, I would say that once people start getting reviews they are allowed to speculate as to who gave them, but no one can say who they actually gave a review to. They can bluff though and say they didn't give a certain review.

Yeah that's what went on last time right? XD Or was that another one of those games? :o

Either way, the speculating is the best part, definitely needs to happen hah.

As for the bolded part - telling people you reviewed them could be a part of the mindgame if you wanna go that deep into it. Maybe it should be allowed in that way?

Pfft, don't be speaking badly about my sunshine. I got a new one. She's fierce. Look at her shine. All black and sleek. Rawr.

yay for new lappys!

• Forums are not to be used to post stories.
• All forum posts must be suitable for teens.
• The owner and moderators of this forum are solely responsible for the content posted within this area.
• All forum abuse must be reported to the moderators.