zygote
08-25-2013, 10:39 PM
WRITING CHALLENGE TOURNAMENT WEEK 6 REVIEW.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fJzZY-ABBHI
General Writers Review.
(1) TYSON: No showed, signed out. Awarded 0 points.
(2) Nigma: Won by no-show again. I feel sorry for Nigma, the most consistently no-showed individual there is. It could be a Rockefeller conspiracy. Awarded 2 points.
(3) Innovator: Couldn’t exactly 100% meet the task requirements, but that was never the point. The restrictions, paradoxically, were there to stimulate. I feel you were able to experiment a lot more this week within the constraints when compared to your last submission in this competition. Voters gave different justifications for where they felt your submission had some issues. There is only one that stood out for me. The ending was perhaps a paragraph too long. It was really picking up when you started using all the environment language, and then you just dropped it in the last paragraph. Instead you brought in these value-judgements (E.g., “Casting blame on the next and the next and the next”) it could have done without this kind of tone. Perhaps even more nature language would have been good - the “deaf to bees” – “The leaves swinging against the winds chest”. Maybe 4-5 more lines like that would have been great. Awarded 1 point.
(4) Adonis: There is often some issue with these kind of submissions where there is an ambiguous character and lots of “I, my, me” phrases. Perhaps it needed some more clarity at the beginning. It was maybe not so good to do the whole “who am I?” thing without enough assistance. It’s a great style, but not exactly the most reader friendly. Still your writing is as enigmatic as usual, more conversational this week. The “Oh the Raid!” part being in an example. It kind of read like a script/screenplay, very interesting. Awarded 1 point.
(5) NYCSPITZ: No showed, signed out. Awarded 0 points.
(6) Storyteller: No showed, signed out. Awarded 0 points.
(7) Objective: Really enjoyed your submission this week. It was maybe my favorite from the entire round, was in the mood for the kind of vocabulary heavy discussion you presented. Didn’t really try to follow any coherent thread throughout the submission, just enjoy the language for the language that it was. E.g. “Doubters demonstrate” – “Creativity destroys clarity as your mindstate expose mental issues” - “Superior designs intertwined” it all reminded me of a lot of cool things. Perhaps your effort would have been a lot better received if you could have been more rhyme scheme intensive. Good approach, just a slightly awkward execution. Awarded 1 point. Voluntarily signed out.
(8) Pent uP: Can tell that Pent uP did not enjoy the writing stimulus this week. I think he enjoys topics where he can interpret them in a different way, impart some of his own view onto it and put it within a fictional setting. Enjoyed it this week, it could have been a story of an individual with insomnia or the personification of insomnia, perhaps either interpretation works. Awarded 2 points. Voluntarily signed out.
(9) oats: DNC.
(10) Boredom: Enjoyed the opening line the most – “i don't understand the task at hand”, it would have been really interesting to see at least one self-aware style of submission. The ending line was very cool also – “..if you continue to live in the past tense, you will never find the future..” considering the topic was no variants of “to be.” It was almost a repeat of last week’s no-show issue, luckily the contest went ahead, it was probably the last to be activated so that is why there were a few less votes. Awarded 1 points.
(11) Figurative: DNC.
(12) The Artful Salopian: The task was no conjunctions; he used semicolons to great effect. Exactly what the challenge memo was talking about with the whole creative solutions approach. Not the longest or the shortest submission, just plain quality. Some sprinkling of techniques such as repetition (this is me, I am etc.) for greater effect, and a good subject matter. No complaints, met the task requirements, some praise. The Artful Salopian/Flo Real always puts in a good effort. Awarded 2 points.
(13)Coup: DNC.
(14) nO gOod!: DNC.
(15) PancakeBrah: The only letter G’s that were contained in PancakeBrah’s submission were silent/unemphasized ones, I thought it was very clever. While perhaps not as impressive/ambitious as his opponents, it compared very favorably. Still winning still motivated. Good effort. Awarded 2 points.
(16) deadman: No showed, signed out. Awarded 0 points.
(17) MikeWrecka: Frank in his usual cryptic way commented that he is glad to be an influence on MikeWrecka’s new conceptual orientated style. I can partly agree, it’s a noticeable difference between this series of submissions from MikeWrecka when compared to the subject matter of the submissions during the AOWL. Here each week it is some different discussion with an interesting format. This week it was emotional discussion, using a formal letter format. It is working well. Good creativity to meet the writing requirements. Ingenious considering it was probably the 2nd hardest topic this week, the task was no same letter in the same sentence. Instead of interpreting this purposively (actually doing the letter-based task). MikeWrecka interpreted it literally and wrote three different “letters” about an individual in prison (a sentence). It is a testament to the competiveness of this league, that even with an undefeated record, MikeWrecka is still closely followed by 3-4 competitors. Awarded 2 points.
(18) Rawn M.D.: DNC.
(19) Plot: No showed, signed out. Awarded 0 points. Is signed back in for this week.
(20) Mr. J: Perhaps it would resonate more if there was less focus on stylistic techniques (E.g., the euthanasia homophone etc) and some more focus given to an overall direction or purpose behind the writing. It doesn’t need to be anything like the reinvention of the wheel, or even something tangible, the abstract stuff works fine as well, just a reason for being/something to draw it all together. The weeks when you have done better have been weeks when you’ve had a focused submission. Awarded 2 points.
(21) Cereal Killa: DNC.
(22) TopicalDood5: DNC.
(23) Gazette: DNC.
(24) Certain Serpent: A fairly standard story but the way it was written was excellent, especially considering the lack of adjectives. It demonstrates that not all descriptive words are needed for a strong effect. Also the best technical execution this week towards meeting task requirements. I made an error stating hopelessly was an adjective, it was actually an adverb. Awarded 2 points.
(25) Just Write: DNC.
(26) Rayge: DNC.
(27) Xnub: DNC.
(28) Split Eight: No showed, signed out. Awarded 0 points.
(29) Brian Bryan: DNC.
(30) VERITAS: Many voters felt apathetic towards your writing and some even outright commented that they disliked it. I thought it was O.K. apparently there were some adjectives too, so task requirements were not met 100%, but it was a decent submission. Always enjoy something different, although it could have been more ambitious. Reminded me of the Rawns imagination land one without the humor aspect. Also VERITAS was banned, so signing you out. Awarded 1 point.
(31) Witty: DNC.
(32) Atheist: DNC.
(33) patrown: No showed, signed out. Awarded 0 points.
(34) Pinot Grij: When you are very comfortable with your writing style you can experiment with the other parts much more freely. The audience interaction is very difficult to do well, but you have managed to make an engaging submission here. It was humorous again. My pop culture knowledge was pretty subpar I could only guess the flux capacitor even with the help of rhymes to guide the answer, but it was a fun read. It also contrasted well with your opponents submission, to make a strong contest all round. Awarded 2 points.
(35) Shogun Dinero: DNC.
(36) Word: No showed, signed out. Awarded 0 points.
(37) PiE: PiE. I read a great biography. Because your writing was great it was either an honest look into your life/mind or a good piece of performance art. Do you understand the first two sentences for your comment this week? The answer will determine whether your online persona is genuine or not. For your submission it terms of feedback, I can’t give you much analysis. It looks like you understand your own writing well, perhaps you just need to work on some aspects of style/readability. Awarded 1 point.
(38) DwnLd: DNC.
(39) Red glare: No showed, signed out. Awarded 0 points.
(40) DeadLion: DNC.
(41) Defy Gravity: Besides, Defy Gravity and PiE most new users have instantly no showed. Hopefully without offending anybody, Defy Gravity has created the most impressive initial submission from a new user to join the competition. Outperformed his opponent in terms of rhyme scheme, although perhaps not the actual the phrases themselves. All the dental discussion was really something else. Enjoyed it a lot, the top highlight was when you brought the writing to crescendo with a series of rhetorical questions. Awarded 2 points.
New Competitors
(42) Sharp Nine: STRENGTH- Musically gifted, can play the bassoon, lute and foot tap all simultaneously. WEAKNESS- Doppelganger for our own Split Eight. I own an air conditioner that has; “Sharp-Split Inverter System.” printed on it. PREDICTION- Sharp Nine is his own individual. Don’t let it fool you or it will be your last mistake. Time to prove to all competitors that you have everything all worked out.
(43) Pryde: STRENGTH- I’ve interacted with this username before, from what I remember he seems sharp and insightful when giving commentary in OM section. WEAKNESS- Despite that it’s difficult to remember specifically anything Pryde has written that stands out, I remember generally that it was good, but not any specific details. PREDICTION- Would like Pryde to do well, to show even joining so late can still be good.
(44) Aesthetic: STRENGTH- 3.3 degree mason without the apron, only 30.7 levels to go before you can enter the goat orgies and demonic rituals. Good luck. WEAKNESS- Writes way too much like 100 lines + every time if I am remembering correctly. PREDICTION- Will probably no-show, but if not it will be an interesting submission.
(45) Formal Logic: STRENGTH- Use of reason within a non-casual setting. WEAKNESS- Didn’t read the rules at sign up, but luckily you have one small cypher post. PREDICTION- Based off username alone I’ll say Formal Logic will finish undefeated unless no-shows.
Points record.
NAME: (POINTS) – Win/Loss/Draw/No Show.
TYSON: (0.0) – 0/0/0/12
Nigma: (9.0) – 4/1/0/0.
Innovator: (7.0) – 2/3/0/0.
Adonis: (7.0) – 2/3/0/0.
NYCSPITZ: (0.0) – 0/0/0/3.
Storyteller: (5.0) – 1/3/0/0.
Objective: (7.0) 2/3/0/0.
Pent uP: (9.0) 4/1/0/0.
oats: (4.0) – 2/0/0/0.
Boredom: (7.0) – 3/1/0/1.
Figurative: (1.0) – 0/1/0/1.
The Artful Salopian: (8.0) – 3/2/0/0.
Coup: (3.5) – 1/0/1/1.
nO gOod!: (0.0) – 0/0/0/1.
PancakeBrah: (9.5) – 4/0/1/0.
deadman: (2.0) – 1/0/0/2.
MikeWrecka: (10.0) – 5/0/0/0.
Rawn M.D.: (4.0) – 1/2/0/1.
Plot: (5.0) – 2/1/0/1.
Mr. J: (6.0) – 2/2/0/1.
Cereal Killa: (0.0) – 0/0/0/1.
TopicalDood5: (3.0) – 1/1/0/1.
Gazette: (1.0) – 0/1/0/1.
Certain Serpent: (8.0) – 3/2/0/0.
Just Write: (0.0) – 0/0/0/1.
Rayge: (0.0) – 0/0/0/2.
Xnub: (0.0) – 0/0/0/1.
Split Eight: (2.0) – 1/0/0/2.
Brian Bryan: (6.0) – 3/0/0/0.
VERITAS: (6.5) – 2/2/0/0.
Witty: (0.0) – 0/0/0/1.
Atheist: (0.0) – 0/0/0/1.
patrown: (3.0) – 1/1/0/2.
Pinot Grij: (5.0) – 2/1/0/0.
Shogun Dinero: (0.0) – 0/0/0/1.
Word: (1.5) – 0/1/0/1.
PiE: (3.0) – 1/1/0/0.
DwnLd: (0.0) – 0/0/0/1.
Read Glare: (1.0) – 0/1/0/1.
DeadLion: (0.0) – 0/0/0/1.
Defy Gravity: (2.0) – 1/0/0/1.
Sharp Nine: N/A.
Pryde: N/A.
Aesthetic: N/A.
Formal Logic: N/A.
Memo week 6.
Greetings competitors, we arrive at a personal favorite. IMITATION WEEK, you are required to attempt an imitation or homage or mimicry or satire or otherwise of your opponent’s writing style. To assist you in your task, there will be 2 links provided with every contest. Please note, the minimum requirement is an imitation of your opponent’s writing style, you are not required to imitate the content of the relevant hyperlink provided along with your contest. You can if you want to, but ultimately that’s your decision. Find below your match-ups and specific tasks.
Specific contests and tasks.
45 v 37. Formal Logic v PiE. TASK: IMITATION – (for your assistance: http://netcees.co/showpost.php?p=130853&postcount=445 v http://netcees.co/showthread.php?t=9662 )
24 v 10. Certain Serpent v Boredom. TASK: IMITATION – (for your assistance: http://netcees.co/showthread.php?t=9944 v http://netcees.co/showpost.php?p=109408&postcount=5 )
2 v 4 Nigma v Adonis. TASK: IMITATION – (for your assistance: http://netcees.co/showthread.php?t=10442 v http://netcees.co/showthread.php?t=9920 )
34 v 12. Pinot Grij v The Artful Salopian. TASK: IMITATION – (for your assistance: http://netcees.co/showpost.php?p=113692&postcount=4 v http://netcees.co/showthread.php?t=7342 )
15 v 41. PancakeBrah v Defy Gravity. TASK: IMITATION – (for your assistance: http://netcees.co/showthread.php?t=5865 v http://netcees.co/showthread.php?t=11390 )
3 v 42. Innovator v Sharp Nine. TASK: IMITATION – (for your assistance: http://netcees.co/showpost.php?p=45966&postcount=6 v http://netcees.co/showthread.php?t=3466 )
44 v 17 v 19. Aesthetic v MikeWrecka v Plot. TASK: IMITATION – (for your assistance: http://netcees.co/showthread.php?t=6629 v http://netcees.co/showthread.php?t=2258 v http://netcees.co/showpost.php?p=120344&postcount=6 )
20 v 43. Mr. J. v Pryde. TASK: IMITATION – (for your assistance: http://netcees.co/showthread.php?t=9045 v http://netcees.co/showthread.php?t=5880 )
Extra part: top 5 positioned
This is opinion based, not based on the points, if you want to see the actual numerical top 5 you can easily see yourself above. This is basically an extra prediction only for this week, because it is a critical stage of the tournament.
1. PancakeBrah: The first deciding factor here is PancakeBrah’s disproving of my prediction from week 5. Seems better rounded now than before, can settle and shift between gears now. This will be essential. The other deciding factor in my decision here is the absence of a loss and the presence of a draw, that extra 0.5 points may be the difference in week 8. PancakeBrah doesn’t achieve such a competitive position by luck of the draw or popularity alone, he has done it on consistent strength of writing.
2. MikeWrecka: Strange to not put the numerical number one in the number 1 position, it was a close choice. The only thing influencing this decision was my memory of the AOWL season and MikeWrecka’s results. From what I recall it was huge winning streaks then short slumps, consecutive losses things like that, very hot-and-cold writer, he feeds off momentum. The question is can he sustain it with a few clutch moments?
3. Nigma: Is relentless, his personality type must be AA battery. An inquiring, resourceful, lateral thinker - would make a fine researcher in any field. Strikes me as the kind of person who must have done very well in school on assignments but maybe not exams. If that is not the case then he was just not challenged enough. Give Nigma a question and he will begin working out solutions with a holy zeal. Still very competitive despite probably feeling he has underperformed at key points.
4. Pent up: Ambitious writing style, never content to leave things half done or unexplored, Pent uP will constantly push his own writing. Combine this sense of perfectionism with a strong writing ability and good understanding of positioning the reading audience and it demonstrates why Pent uP is synonymous with dominance in this creative format. Apparently bilingual too, English isn’t even his preferred language of daily communication. Placed at 4rd position after only one close loss to MikeWrecka. Also, because signed out for this week.
5. Certain Serpent: Any one loss from 1,2,3,4 will bring Certain Serpent and the other users on similar point levels into serious contention. I place Certain Serpent over his compatriots based on the evidence alone. Certain Serpent is a real thinking writer, does a lot of subtle things to improve the strength of his writing. The thing is Certain Serpent can still win, the randomized match ups were fortunate not to place any of the top 4 in the same contest. It’s improbable but still possible.
3 ‘crowd favorites.’
1. Adonis: Also in the pack with 6-7 points, wasn’t included in the top 5 positioned only by a hairs width. Whoever Adonis is randomly matched with may struggle with their imitation task. Adonis has an atypical style that is always interesting to read, sometimes it seems unrefined, even arguably clumsy. In every submission there are at least one or two excellent lines of the most entertaining kind.
2. Pinot Grij: So far Pinot has showcased his humor but he is not a one trick writer. I remember reading an informed discussion on PTSD in NWL which had insight. It was more than just a standard story about the fragile mind; it was like a study of relationships and the value of life after dehumanization. It managed to be humanistic and pessimistic at the same time, haven’t read much like it either in fiction or nonfiction before or after. Back to the current time, only thing counting against Pinot Grij for top 5 positioned is the number of week’s participation. No one can hold that against him, he only discovered the website a few weeks ago. I look forward to reading more, and hopefully competing against Pinot in the next installment of the AOWL whenever that may be.
3. Brian Bryan: Doesn’t normally compete in these kind of things, but he has been the epitome of what this type of construct was supposed to represent from the outset. Brain Bryan has been so entertaining and successful because each week from his writing it appears he does not view the challenges as hurdles or restrictions to overcome, but rather stimuli with which he can channel and use for creation. Glad you competed.
General Information and FAQ.
How many weeks will the tournament go for?
There will be 8 weeks of standard competition, and a special 9nth week tiebreaker week only in the event of tied rankings.
How are rankings and record calculated?
All wins are awarded 2 points. A loss is awarded 1 point. If you “No show” you are awarded 0 points. Tied matches at the end of the voting period are awarded 1.5 points each.
Tied matches at the end of the voting period?
Voting periods will not be extended beyond the deadline, tied outcomes are O.K. Submissions due Wednesday 23:59 PST. Ext due Thursday 23:59 PST. Voting due Sunday 11:59 PST. Weekly Memo uploaded Sunday subject to schedule.
What are the voting regulations?
Standard 3 required votes any less than 3 results in a vote deduction from your contest.
What are the voting guidelines?
Long paragraphs etc are not required, any justification of your vote is sufficient, it can be simple, as long as it is not arbitrary or unexplained. Voting based on your own subjective opinion, basically how much you enjoyed either, there is no requirement for you to vote based on writings compliance to the task. I can’t speak for all voters, but you will never have a submission DQ’d for ‘not conforming’ to the topic.
What will get me banished from the tournament?
Plagiarism (including self-plagiarism of old material), double accounts, editing your submission after your opponent has also submitted or voting has commenced, any unnecessary comments creating bias for your contest.
What are the deadlines for writing?
Weekly Magazines containing the Weekly Memo (general theme) will be released, along with the specific pages containing your writing task instructions (specific tasks). Then you will have 3 days standard +1 day if required extension period to complete your writing. Voting can begin whenever the contests both have writing submissions, and will stay open for votes until the next Weekly Memo. The scheduled process should not take more than 7 days.
What should I write?
Whatever you want, the aim of the writing challenge tasks is to stimulate not restrict. There are no min or max line limits.
How are contest competitors chosen?
On sign up each competitor will be given a number. Using random.org 2 numbers are paired with each other. Match ups are always randomized rather than based on any system of high-ranking vs high-ranking etc.
What if there is an odd number of competitors for a round?
In the event of an odd number of competitors, there will be a 1v1v1 contest with all standard rules applying.
What are the sign in regulations?
Signing in is open to all for all rounds, 2 required votes for sign in to be effective after week 1 sign ins. If you no-show you are signed-out and must sign-back in to receive a matchup. New clause: If there is an odd number of competitors (see contest list in review) and you wish to sign in for next week. First come first served can nominate to sign in for the current week.
No-show repairing?
There will be no no-show repairing’s, as consideration of your effort if you are no-showed there will be an additional length review of your writing in the following memo.
Are multimedia aids allowed?
Yes. You can use pictures, videos, soundbytes, and other multimedia to aid your weekly submissions.
What does the number beside my username mean?
They don’t mean anything, they are not rankings. They are just your original sign-in number used for random assignment to tasks and contests. Note, the competitors are assigned randomly to tasks, not the other way around, so all task allocation is randomized as well.
Will there be a champion?
Yes, at the end of the 8 weeks (or if needed 9 weeks) league the highest points will be given the tile of champion of writing tournament. You will receive if you wish the text underneath your user name stating “Challenge League Champion.”
Closing Weekly Comment.
Someone wrote the topics have been good they are the backbone to a strong league, while this is a nice comment, I cannot agree with it fully. You are the backbone to a strong league, active submissions, minimizing no show by pre-emptively signing out, required voting, even banter and comments has its place in keeping individuals motivated. The end prize is nominal, so I hope you agree it’s the process not the product that is the backbone keeping everything running upright. Good luck to all competitors for completing your submissions.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fJzZY-ABBHI
General Writers Review.
(1) TYSON: No showed, signed out. Awarded 0 points.
(2) Nigma: Won by no-show again. I feel sorry for Nigma, the most consistently no-showed individual there is. It could be a Rockefeller conspiracy. Awarded 2 points.
(3) Innovator: Couldn’t exactly 100% meet the task requirements, but that was never the point. The restrictions, paradoxically, were there to stimulate. I feel you were able to experiment a lot more this week within the constraints when compared to your last submission in this competition. Voters gave different justifications for where they felt your submission had some issues. There is only one that stood out for me. The ending was perhaps a paragraph too long. It was really picking up when you started using all the environment language, and then you just dropped it in the last paragraph. Instead you brought in these value-judgements (E.g., “Casting blame on the next and the next and the next”) it could have done without this kind of tone. Perhaps even more nature language would have been good - the “deaf to bees” – “The leaves swinging against the winds chest”. Maybe 4-5 more lines like that would have been great. Awarded 1 point.
(4) Adonis: There is often some issue with these kind of submissions where there is an ambiguous character and lots of “I, my, me” phrases. Perhaps it needed some more clarity at the beginning. It was maybe not so good to do the whole “who am I?” thing without enough assistance. It’s a great style, but not exactly the most reader friendly. Still your writing is as enigmatic as usual, more conversational this week. The “Oh the Raid!” part being in an example. It kind of read like a script/screenplay, very interesting. Awarded 1 point.
(5) NYCSPITZ: No showed, signed out. Awarded 0 points.
(6) Storyteller: No showed, signed out. Awarded 0 points.
(7) Objective: Really enjoyed your submission this week. It was maybe my favorite from the entire round, was in the mood for the kind of vocabulary heavy discussion you presented. Didn’t really try to follow any coherent thread throughout the submission, just enjoy the language for the language that it was. E.g. “Doubters demonstrate” – “Creativity destroys clarity as your mindstate expose mental issues” - “Superior designs intertwined” it all reminded me of a lot of cool things. Perhaps your effort would have been a lot better received if you could have been more rhyme scheme intensive. Good approach, just a slightly awkward execution. Awarded 1 point. Voluntarily signed out.
(8) Pent uP: Can tell that Pent uP did not enjoy the writing stimulus this week. I think he enjoys topics where he can interpret them in a different way, impart some of his own view onto it and put it within a fictional setting. Enjoyed it this week, it could have been a story of an individual with insomnia or the personification of insomnia, perhaps either interpretation works. Awarded 2 points. Voluntarily signed out.
(9) oats: DNC.
(10) Boredom: Enjoyed the opening line the most – “i don't understand the task at hand”, it would have been really interesting to see at least one self-aware style of submission. The ending line was very cool also – “..if you continue to live in the past tense, you will never find the future..” considering the topic was no variants of “to be.” It was almost a repeat of last week’s no-show issue, luckily the contest went ahead, it was probably the last to be activated so that is why there were a few less votes. Awarded 1 points.
(11) Figurative: DNC.
(12) The Artful Salopian: The task was no conjunctions; he used semicolons to great effect. Exactly what the challenge memo was talking about with the whole creative solutions approach. Not the longest or the shortest submission, just plain quality. Some sprinkling of techniques such as repetition (this is me, I am etc.) for greater effect, and a good subject matter. No complaints, met the task requirements, some praise. The Artful Salopian/Flo Real always puts in a good effort. Awarded 2 points.
(13)Coup: DNC.
(14) nO gOod!: DNC.
(15) PancakeBrah: The only letter G’s that were contained in PancakeBrah’s submission were silent/unemphasized ones, I thought it was very clever. While perhaps not as impressive/ambitious as his opponents, it compared very favorably. Still winning still motivated. Good effort. Awarded 2 points.
(16) deadman: No showed, signed out. Awarded 0 points.
(17) MikeWrecka: Frank in his usual cryptic way commented that he is glad to be an influence on MikeWrecka’s new conceptual orientated style. I can partly agree, it’s a noticeable difference between this series of submissions from MikeWrecka when compared to the subject matter of the submissions during the AOWL. Here each week it is some different discussion with an interesting format. This week it was emotional discussion, using a formal letter format. It is working well. Good creativity to meet the writing requirements. Ingenious considering it was probably the 2nd hardest topic this week, the task was no same letter in the same sentence. Instead of interpreting this purposively (actually doing the letter-based task). MikeWrecka interpreted it literally and wrote three different “letters” about an individual in prison (a sentence). It is a testament to the competiveness of this league, that even with an undefeated record, MikeWrecka is still closely followed by 3-4 competitors. Awarded 2 points.
(18) Rawn M.D.: DNC.
(19) Plot: No showed, signed out. Awarded 0 points. Is signed back in for this week.
(20) Mr. J: Perhaps it would resonate more if there was less focus on stylistic techniques (E.g., the euthanasia homophone etc) and some more focus given to an overall direction or purpose behind the writing. It doesn’t need to be anything like the reinvention of the wheel, or even something tangible, the abstract stuff works fine as well, just a reason for being/something to draw it all together. The weeks when you have done better have been weeks when you’ve had a focused submission. Awarded 2 points.
(21) Cereal Killa: DNC.
(22) TopicalDood5: DNC.
(23) Gazette: DNC.
(24) Certain Serpent: A fairly standard story but the way it was written was excellent, especially considering the lack of adjectives. It demonstrates that not all descriptive words are needed for a strong effect. Also the best technical execution this week towards meeting task requirements. I made an error stating hopelessly was an adjective, it was actually an adverb. Awarded 2 points.
(25) Just Write: DNC.
(26) Rayge: DNC.
(27) Xnub: DNC.
(28) Split Eight: No showed, signed out. Awarded 0 points.
(29) Brian Bryan: DNC.
(30) VERITAS: Many voters felt apathetic towards your writing and some even outright commented that they disliked it. I thought it was O.K. apparently there were some adjectives too, so task requirements were not met 100%, but it was a decent submission. Always enjoy something different, although it could have been more ambitious. Reminded me of the Rawns imagination land one without the humor aspect. Also VERITAS was banned, so signing you out. Awarded 1 point.
(31) Witty: DNC.
(32) Atheist: DNC.
(33) patrown: No showed, signed out. Awarded 0 points.
(34) Pinot Grij: When you are very comfortable with your writing style you can experiment with the other parts much more freely. The audience interaction is very difficult to do well, but you have managed to make an engaging submission here. It was humorous again. My pop culture knowledge was pretty subpar I could only guess the flux capacitor even with the help of rhymes to guide the answer, but it was a fun read. It also contrasted well with your opponents submission, to make a strong contest all round. Awarded 2 points.
(35) Shogun Dinero: DNC.
(36) Word: No showed, signed out. Awarded 0 points.
(37) PiE: PiE. I read a great biography. Because your writing was great it was either an honest look into your life/mind or a good piece of performance art. Do you understand the first two sentences for your comment this week? The answer will determine whether your online persona is genuine or not. For your submission it terms of feedback, I can’t give you much analysis. It looks like you understand your own writing well, perhaps you just need to work on some aspects of style/readability. Awarded 1 point.
(38) DwnLd: DNC.
(39) Red glare: No showed, signed out. Awarded 0 points.
(40) DeadLion: DNC.
(41) Defy Gravity: Besides, Defy Gravity and PiE most new users have instantly no showed. Hopefully without offending anybody, Defy Gravity has created the most impressive initial submission from a new user to join the competition. Outperformed his opponent in terms of rhyme scheme, although perhaps not the actual the phrases themselves. All the dental discussion was really something else. Enjoyed it a lot, the top highlight was when you brought the writing to crescendo with a series of rhetorical questions. Awarded 2 points.
New Competitors
(42) Sharp Nine: STRENGTH- Musically gifted, can play the bassoon, lute and foot tap all simultaneously. WEAKNESS- Doppelganger for our own Split Eight. I own an air conditioner that has; “Sharp-Split Inverter System.” printed on it. PREDICTION- Sharp Nine is his own individual. Don’t let it fool you or it will be your last mistake. Time to prove to all competitors that you have everything all worked out.
(43) Pryde: STRENGTH- I’ve interacted with this username before, from what I remember he seems sharp and insightful when giving commentary in OM section. WEAKNESS- Despite that it’s difficult to remember specifically anything Pryde has written that stands out, I remember generally that it was good, but not any specific details. PREDICTION- Would like Pryde to do well, to show even joining so late can still be good.
(44) Aesthetic: STRENGTH- 3.3 degree mason without the apron, only 30.7 levels to go before you can enter the goat orgies and demonic rituals. Good luck. WEAKNESS- Writes way too much like 100 lines + every time if I am remembering correctly. PREDICTION- Will probably no-show, but if not it will be an interesting submission.
(45) Formal Logic: STRENGTH- Use of reason within a non-casual setting. WEAKNESS- Didn’t read the rules at sign up, but luckily you have one small cypher post. PREDICTION- Based off username alone I’ll say Formal Logic will finish undefeated unless no-shows.
Points record.
NAME: (POINTS) – Win/Loss/Draw/No Show.
TYSON: (0.0) – 0/0/0/12
Nigma: (9.0) – 4/1/0/0.
Innovator: (7.0) – 2/3/0/0.
Adonis: (7.0) – 2/3/0/0.
NYCSPITZ: (0.0) – 0/0/0/3.
Storyteller: (5.0) – 1/3/0/0.
Objective: (7.0) 2/3/0/0.
Pent uP: (9.0) 4/1/0/0.
oats: (4.0) – 2/0/0/0.
Boredom: (7.0) – 3/1/0/1.
Figurative: (1.0) – 0/1/0/1.
The Artful Salopian: (8.0) – 3/2/0/0.
Coup: (3.5) – 1/0/1/1.
nO gOod!: (0.0) – 0/0/0/1.
PancakeBrah: (9.5) – 4/0/1/0.
deadman: (2.0) – 1/0/0/2.
MikeWrecka: (10.0) – 5/0/0/0.
Rawn M.D.: (4.0) – 1/2/0/1.
Plot: (5.0) – 2/1/0/1.
Mr. J: (6.0) – 2/2/0/1.
Cereal Killa: (0.0) – 0/0/0/1.
TopicalDood5: (3.0) – 1/1/0/1.
Gazette: (1.0) – 0/1/0/1.
Certain Serpent: (8.0) – 3/2/0/0.
Just Write: (0.0) – 0/0/0/1.
Rayge: (0.0) – 0/0/0/2.
Xnub: (0.0) – 0/0/0/1.
Split Eight: (2.0) – 1/0/0/2.
Brian Bryan: (6.0) – 3/0/0/0.
VERITAS: (6.5) – 2/2/0/0.
Witty: (0.0) – 0/0/0/1.
Atheist: (0.0) – 0/0/0/1.
patrown: (3.0) – 1/1/0/2.
Pinot Grij: (5.0) – 2/1/0/0.
Shogun Dinero: (0.0) – 0/0/0/1.
Word: (1.5) – 0/1/0/1.
PiE: (3.0) – 1/1/0/0.
DwnLd: (0.0) – 0/0/0/1.
Read Glare: (1.0) – 0/1/0/1.
DeadLion: (0.0) – 0/0/0/1.
Defy Gravity: (2.0) – 1/0/0/1.
Sharp Nine: N/A.
Pryde: N/A.
Aesthetic: N/A.
Formal Logic: N/A.
Memo week 6.
Greetings competitors, we arrive at a personal favorite. IMITATION WEEK, you are required to attempt an imitation or homage or mimicry or satire or otherwise of your opponent’s writing style. To assist you in your task, there will be 2 links provided with every contest. Please note, the minimum requirement is an imitation of your opponent’s writing style, you are not required to imitate the content of the relevant hyperlink provided along with your contest. You can if you want to, but ultimately that’s your decision. Find below your match-ups and specific tasks.
Specific contests and tasks.
45 v 37. Formal Logic v PiE. TASK: IMITATION – (for your assistance: http://netcees.co/showpost.php?p=130853&postcount=445 v http://netcees.co/showthread.php?t=9662 )
24 v 10. Certain Serpent v Boredom. TASK: IMITATION – (for your assistance: http://netcees.co/showthread.php?t=9944 v http://netcees.co/showpost.php?p=109408&postcount=5 )
2 v 4 Nigma v Adonis. TASK: IMITATION – (for your assistance: http://netcees.co/showthread.php?t=10442 v http://netcees.co/showthread.php?t=9920 )
34 v 12. Pinot Grij v The Artful Salopian. TASK: IMITATION – (for your assistance: http://netcees.co/showpost.php?p=113692&postcount=4 v http://netcees.co/showthread.php?t=7342 )
15 v 41. PancakeBrah v Defy Gravity. TASK: IMITATION – (for your assistance: http://netcees.co/showthread.php?t=5865 v http://netcees.co/showthread.php?t=11390 )
3 v 42. Innovator v Sharp Nine. TASK: IMITATION – (for your assistance: http://netcees.co/showpost.php?p=45966&postcount=6 v http://netcees.co/showthread.php?t=3466 )
44 v 17 v 19. Aesthetic v MikeWrecka v Plot. TASK: IMITATION – (for your assistance: http://netcees.co/showthread.php?t=6629 v http://netcees.co/showthread.php?t=2258 v http://netcees.co/showpost.php?p=120344&postcount=6 )
20 v 43. Mr. J. v Pryde. TASK: IMITATION – (for your assistance: http://netcees.co/showthread.php?t=9045 v http://netcees.co/showthread.php?t=5880 )
Extra part: top 5 positioned
This is opinion based, not based on the points, if you want to see the actual numerical top 5 you can easily see yourself above. This is basically an extra prediction only for this week, because it is a critical stage of the tournament.
1. PancakeBrah: The first deciding factor here is PancakeBrah’s disproving of my prediction from week 5. Seems better rounded now than before, can settle and shift between gears now. This will be essential. The other deciding factor in my decision here is the absence of a loss and the presence of a draw, that extra 0.5 points may be the difference in week 8. PancakeBrah doesn’t achieve such a competitive position by luck of the draw or popularity alone, he has done it on consistent strength of writing.
2. MikeWrecka: Strange to not put the numerical number one in the number 1 position, it was a close choice. The only thing influencing this decision was my memory of the AOWL season and MikeWrecka’s results. From what I recall it was huge winning streaks then short slumps, consecutive losses things like that, very hot-and-cold writer, he feeds off momentum. The question is can he sustain it with a few clutch moments?
3. Nigma: Is relentless, his personality type must be AA battery. An inquiring, resourceful, lateral thinker - would make a fine researcher in any field. Strikes me as the kind of person who must have done very well in school on assignments but maybe not exams. If that is not the case then he was just not challenged enough. Give Nigma a question and he will begin working out solutions with a holy zeal. Still very competitive despite probably feeling he has underperformed at key points.
4. Pent up: Ambitious writing style, never content to leave things half done or unexplored, Pent uP will constantly push his own writing. Combine this sense of perfectionism with a strong writing ability and good understanding of positioning the reading audience and it demonstrates why Pent uP is synonymous with dominance in this creative format. Apparently bilingual too, English isn’t even his preferred language of daily communication. Placed at 4rd position after only one close loss to MikeWrecka. Also, because signed out for this week.
5. Certain Serpent: Any one loss from 1,2,3,4 will bring Certain Serpent and the other users on similar point levels into serious contention. I place Certain Serpent over his compatriots based on the evidence alone. Certain Serpent is a real thinking writer, does a lot of subtle things to improve the strength of his writing. The thing is Certain Serpent can still win, the randomized match ups were fortunate not to place any of the top 4 in the same contest. It’s improbable but still possible.
3 ‘crowd favorites.’
1. Adonis: Also in the pack with 6-7 points, wasn’t included in the top 5 positioned only by a hairs width. Whoever Adonis is randomly matched with may struggle with their imitation task. Adonis has an atypical style that is always interesting to read, sometimes it seems unrefined, even arguably clumsy. In every submission there are at least one or two excellent lines of the most entertaining kind.
2. Pinot Grij: So far Pinot has showcased his humor but he is not a one trick writer. I remember reading an informed discussion on PTSD in NWL which had insight. It was more than just a standard story about the fragile mind; it was like a study of relationships and the value of life after dehumanization. It managed to be humanistic and pessimistic at the same time, haven’t read much like it either in fiction or nonfiction before or after. Back to the current time, only thing counting against Pinot Grij for top 5 positioned is the number of week’s participation. No one can hold that against him, he only discovered the website a few weeks ago. I look forward to reading more, and hopefully competing against Pinot in the next installment of the AOWL whenever that may be.
3. Brian Bryan: Doesn’t normally compete in these kind of things, but he has been the epitome of what this type of construct was supposed to represent from the outset. Brain Bryan has been so entertaining and successful because each week from his writing it appears he does not view the challenges as hurdles or restrictions to overcome, but rather stimuli with which he can channel and use for creation. Glad you competed.
General Information and FAQ.
How many weeks will the tournament go for?
There will be 8 weeks of standard competition, and a special 9nth week tiebreaker week only in the event of tied rankings.
How are rankings and record calculated?
All wins are awarded 2 points. A loss is awarded 1 point. If you “No show” you are awarded 0 points. Tied matches at the end of the voting period are awarded 1.5 points each.
Tied matches at the end of the voting period?
Voting periods will not be extended beyond the deadline, tied outcomes are O.K. Submissions due Wednesday 23:59 PST. Ext due Thursday 23:59 PST. Voting due Sunday 11:59 PST. Weekly Memo uploaded Sunday subject to schedule.
What are the voting regulations?
Standard 3 required votes any less than 3 results in a vote deduction from your contest.
What are the voting guidelines?
Long paragraphs etc are not required, any justification of your vote is sufficient, it can be simple, as long as it is not arbitrary or unexplained. Voting based on your own subjective opinion, basically how much you enjoyed either, there is no requirement for you to vote based on writings compliance to the task. I can’t speak for all voters, but you will never have a submission DQ’d for ‘not conforming’ to the topic.
What will get me banished from the tournament?
Plagiarism (including self-plagiarism of old material), double accounts, editing your submission after your opponent has also submitted or voting has commenced, any unnecessary comments creating bias for your contest.
What are the deadlines for writing?
Weekly Magazines containing the Weekly Memo (general theme) will be released, along with the specific pages containing your writing task instructions (specific tasks). Then you will have 3 days standard +1 day if required extension period to complete your writing. Voting can begin whenever the contests both have writing submissions, and will stay open for votes until the next Weekly Memo. The scheduled process should not take more than 7 days.
What should I write?
Whatever you want, the aim of the writing challenge tasks is to stimulate not restrict. There are no min or max line limits.
How are contest competitors chosen?
On sign up each competitor will be given a number. Using random.org 2 numbers are paired with each other. Match ups are always randomized rather than based on any system of high-ranking vs high-ranking etc.
What if there is an odd number of competitors for a round?
In the event of an odd number of competitors, there will be a 1v1v1 contest with all standard rules applying.
What are the sign in regulations?
Signing in is open to all for all rounds, 2 required votes for sign in to be effective after week 1 sign ins. If you no-show you are signed-out and must sign-back in to receive a matchup. New clause: If there is an odd number of competitors (see contest list in review) and you wish to sign in for next week. First come first served can nominate to sign in for the current week.
No-show repairing?
There will be no no-show repairing’s, as consideration of your effort if you are no-showed there will be an additional length review of your writing in the following memo.
Are multimedia aids allowed?
Yes. You can use pictures, videos, soundbytes, and other multimedia to aid your weekly submissions.
What does the number beside my username mean?
They don’t mean anything, they are not rankings. They are just your original sign-in number used for random assignment to tasks and contests. Note, the competitors are assigned randomly to tasks, not the other way around, so all task allocation is randomized as well.
Will there be a champion?
Yes, at the end of the 8 weeks (or if needed 9 weeks) league the highest points will be given the tile of champion of writing tournament. You will receive if you wish the text underneath your user name stating “Challenge League Champion.”
Closing Weekly Comment.
Someone wrote the topics have been good they are the backbone to a strong league, while this is a nice comment, I cannot agree with it fully. You are the backbone to a strong league, active submissions, minimizing no show by pre-emptively signing out, required voting, even banter and comments has its place in keeping individuals motivated. The end prize is nominal, so I hope you agree it’s the process not the product that is the backbone keeping everything running upright. Good luck to all competitors for completing your submissions.