Our First Chapters Writing Competition was a tremendous success, with two Gather authors to be published in the fall. Terry Shaw, author of The Way Life Should Be, and Geoffrey Edwards, author of Fire Bell in the Night, will have their books published by Simon & Schuster in September and sold in Borders bookstores across the country and wherever books are sold.
Over the past few weeks, we have received numerous questions from Gather members and the media about the future of First Chapters. Will we run another competition? If so, when will it be?
We are thrilled that the interest in First Chapters continues to be so strong. We’re in the process of finalizing our plans and will be making a series of major announcements within the next few weeks. So please stay tuned, and get ready for an exciting summer!
|
|
recommend this
email
print
link to this page
Comments: 98
Now I do have one recommendation; can you have some way of categorizing the entries by genre? I believe that might help.
One more idea of mine was if you could have categories such as romance, fantasy, young adult, mystery, ect. and have a winner from each category. (just a thought)
I can't wait to hear more about the next upcoming competition!
Thanks for your thoughts. I can't provide any more details at this time, but alot more information will be forthcoming in a few weeks. We just wanted everyone to know that something exciting is in the works.
Carl
This way the reader would kind of have an idea on what the story is about.
Can't wait to hear more!
Keep up the great work!
Whatever "more" is will probably be good. All the Best
Carl
(I'm working on two novels right now and am wondering if I will have enough time to get both or at least one of them finished before the competition starts.)
Even if you can't tell me, I'm still excited and can't wait to find out more!
Hopefully your staff will review all of that stuff and make the next one a REALLY BIG event!!
The synopsis of each story should be provided along with Chapter One. Having categories may be too difficult but something along those lines would be an improvement.
Good Luck to you and to Gather!!
I might be in, depends on what happens with my prior commitments.
Of course if she decides to represent me then I cannot participate in the next competition, but I'll still be there to cheer on the other authors!
Good Luck!
And remember: EDIT! EDIT! AND EDIT AGAIN!
And as to submitting something that's already been published...I don't think so for this contest...but Gather is full of stories...
I look forward to sharing alot more in just a few weeks.
Fact: only 1,800+ FirstChapters were posted.....I personally fully read 1,500+ of them, and their related comments. Not to brag, but to be clear about the validity of my statements, I was the only person to read so many…and keeping notes on all. When you have rated them all, and read most of them, patterns emerge. A number of 2,600+ is thrown around, but only 1,800+ were posted......hundreds in the last daiz, hence my inability to read them all fully. So, either the number is inflated; or, 800 never even saw the light of day.
1) Most FirstChapters entries were trashed, and the authors told ridiculous comments by 'experts.'
2) Most First Chapters entries had less that 30 comments......many hundreds of entries only had 2 or 3 comments; and people like myself came along to give them support and a bit of perspective. For this effort, the entrants were very grateful and positive.....it was the only reason many of us persisted in reading/rating....to make up for Gather's insensitivity.
3) The FirstChapters entrants were shamelessly used, abused, and discarded. All knew that it was a 'contest' to create webhits to the site; but there was very little justice to the system of rating/selection/fair review. In order to narrow the field, almost every submission was assaulted by commenter's/raters with an agenda.
4) There were many entrants that submitted brilliant work; and theirs was left in the dust....due to the pre-emptive assault by sock puppets and 'expert' suck ups. The authors with brilliant work generally understood that theirs was good, and the system terribly flawed....so they weren't too upset/hurt by the mess. But many authors with really great works were unsure of themselves, due to the fact that they posted their life's work for the first time anywhere....trusting Gather to be responsible, and expecting the system to give constructive feedback.....for friends, family, and co-workers to see. Then, they were trashed....and devastated....publicly. I am not sure of many things that could do greater harm to a person....and no apologies were made. Instead there is the posturing for future debacles.....hello? Reality anyone?
5) While there was voter fraud, and efforts towards the end to frustrate/correct it; most of the fraud was allowed and encouraged by Gather members/admin through baseless comments that destroyed the credibility of submissions within the first five comments/ratings. With such a large group of submissions, that was impossible for people to recover from.....both 'competition wise' (as was the intent), and personally.
6) In my 49 years on this earth, I have not seen or experienced so much brutal infliction of pain on so many unsuspecting individuals......(except for wars).....with a cold, careless, detachment of "life isn't fair" statements thrown out for 'humor.' It was so bad, that it was incomprehensible to many of us that it was intentional.
But, this was totally avoidable.....and could have been corrected midstream, if the admin people cared…or listened. Can't blame it on: "We were so happy to have such an overwhelming response;" instead, blame it on: "We had a plan, and are sticking to it....regardless of the effects on others; or, if it makes any sense."
The only saving grace was selecting an additional submission for publication, given that the 'ringer' that was so widely announced by many members throughout the 'contest' was awarded first prize. A piece, btw, that borders on hate lit....implying that gay bashing is ok. The main character's friend is brutally murdered in a gay cruising park, and his only concern is that people might think that he was gay....not that his best friend is dead.....zero sympathy there.
7) No mention has been made as to the disposition of 1,800 + people's manuscripts after the 'competition.' Have they been destroyed; or are they 'available' for certain people to peruse as they desire?
This whole debacle has been discussed ad nauseum throughout the contest, and even afterwards. Repeating all that is unnecessary; but blindly running forward with another 'contest' without making serious changes (i.e. that people can see who rated them & what scores go along with comments), is plain ludicrous. I guess I am the only one left standing that will say the emperor has no clothes......the rest have given up hope that things will improve on Gather. Just when we think...or have been led to think... it has, there is a nonsensical post like this article.
Almost anything can be recovered, if people are honest about what went wrong and what needs to be fixed....then do what they say to fix it. All the members would even help, if they could trust and believe in the system. But these kinds of bold and blinded statements only weaken people's trust further......versus building real support.
People deserve an apology. Then, if you want to try it again....make real changes, with the input of members, and give it some time. Otherwise, it's just suckering in more unsuspecting sincere folks. Then the result? Real failure...... a dead business, whose horrible unredeemable reputation sank it.
While some people may not like "Patrick's bluntness," and it may seem like I am just being a pain in the ass; I have spent a huge amount of time an effort to bring balance to a totally out of balance situation.
FIRST, to eliminate the apparent hurtfulness of what seemed like a few malcontents.......hence the "10's" to all to bring the contest into a positive zone.
THEN, after the tide was turned in the contest to a positive flow; to battle the unseen backroom forces that sank most submissions before they even were read.
NOW, to try and break through the corporate/speak denial that spins falsehoods as 'marketing.' Why do I do all of this? To help Gather be what Gather represented itself to be....a safe place for writers. To not lose the major investment of time and energy that literally thousands of people have entrusted Gather with. For Gather to be different than the random mess of propaganda that the internet has become.....i.e. what it promised to be.
I am not alone in these efforts, but feel increasingly alone in my persistence. While many in Gather admin appear to be helpful and caring people, many are not.....and at the end of the day, the 'have nots' seem to win out. So I sense a struggle inside, as well as outside. The only solution to resolving all, growing/evolving, and moving on, is to get real. Be honest. Be forthright. Sincerely....
Otherwise? Everyone has wasted so much time, money, and energy....for nothing. Who wants to be a conflicted mess of pain generation? Who, in their right mind, wants to be a part of that?
So, Carl.....please take these words as they are meant....as a sincere message of 'no more denial,' for everyone's sake. Yeah, you will eventually wear me out if the denial keeps being reinforced.....and people like me will continue to leave, never to return. But not for the reasons you may think.....i.e. frustrated efforts. We are not like you, so you can't evaluate us/project upon us with what you would do.....well, not accurately.
We would leave out of a final acceptance that the patient is too far gone, and all further efforts are a waste of time. Sad, but true. Thousands already have left in the past few months.....just from FirstChapters alone, even with our encouragement to stay and trust Gather for a bit longer. There are about 200 FirstChapters authors resident in the Science Fiction and Fantasy Groups; and about 25 more others from other genres....out of 1,800!!
That alone is a scary fact that says more than I can. So if you can't hear the words from a guy who kept that abortion called FirstChapters afloat- just to keep people from being trashed further, and who has retained the largest number of FirstChapter authors; then do the math. Its getting harder every day, just to get readers and commenter's for valid articles.....and you want to make that worse by being More deceptive instead of being more Forthright? Hint: its just the opposite of what needs to be done to re-build trust.
Justa few thoughts….
I would love the contest to be open to non-US residents.
... another contest ripe for lampoon !!!
On a very serious note:
If there are not stated genre categories with equal prizes for each declared genre, this proposed contest is already a complete disaster...
If the ability to rate/vote is not tied to making a comment and the rating displayed inside the comment box, this proposed contest is already a complete disaster...
If this contest is again to be based on reader voting/rating (popularity contest) instead of having some sort of third-party editorial review in the early rounds of the contest ...well... this proposed contest is already a complete disaster...
If this new contest is again going to have a designated entry from the publisher - the known ringer - this proposed contest is already doomed! It can be declared a failure now, discarded, and we can save the community a lot of turmoil.
I look forward to the major announcements.
At the same time, I'm pretty sure Gather knows that some things need to get fixed before the next contest. I've talked about some of those things a number of times and don't really need to get into them again. The more I think about it though, the more I think that the key to making this work is attracting more readers who are willing to look at multiple entries. In order to do that, Gather needs to give potential readers tools to get to stories that they might enjoy. There should be synopses, genre classifications, and any other tool you can think of to make reading contest entries a more enjoyable experience for readers. A lot of the negative things we saw in the last contest don't have anywhere near the same impact when there are a lot of readers.
I've said this before, but I want to emphasize it here: The way a contest like this is structured can make it a Darwinian free-for all. It can also make the contest something that helps build a stronger writer community here on Gather. It is in the interest of both contestants and Gather that the structure of the contest be structured to encourage contestants to form strong ties to other people in the Gather community.
Too many of even the top 20 in the last contest never ventured out of First Chapters to discover the rest of what Gather had to offer. Too many of their friends stopped by once each round to vote and did nothing else on Gather. That's not in Gather's best interest and it is also not in the best interest of finding the good manuscripts.
I'm very happy that Gather is going to be doing this again, but I do hope that the structure of the next contest reflects a great many lessons learned.
-Judi
Beauty and The Best, Top 20 Finalist First Chapters I
And let us remember Go Red Sox!
It's obvious that most everyone commenting here really does want to participate in a legitimate competition. I can only hope that you read all these suggestions and employ those that are reasonable. By taking these suggestions to heart, you are validating the concerns of the membership and fostering the integrity of Gather.
I look forward to the next competition, provided positive change occurs in the entire process, start to finish. Best of luck.
Carole
Cutthroat contests that can be "judged" by a group of computer whizzes or those who chose to putdown legitimate writers are easy to come by, and gather lost all credibility for me by the rude comments of those who were driveby rude to raise their own points.
By the way, my own writing was badly formatted by Gather, so that there were no paragraph breaks or tabs. It was unreadable, and the earlier remarks registered that, but Gather left the early remarks there long after I asked them to be removed, with the lower points.
And too many submissions should be narrowed by the Gather-hired educated readers, not some group of people looking for a date on line by putting gratuitious photos of themselves on line.
The points systems at Gather will not work any better for good writers than the GOP election owned Diebold -ESS machines and the caging of minority votes by Rove worked for the Democrats.
I think you would be better off working to make a good system to "present" good work without an agent, and letting professional publishers decide who will get the winning publishing contract.
You only have one chance to make a good impression as a writing contest, Gather, and you blew it.
My main complaints about the contest are:
1. I could never understand how chapters having hundreds of votes did not make it to the top 15, while those with many fewer votes were included in the top 15. Math is not my thing, but no amount of number-juggling could have made that possible. I will always believe that the votes did not count and the final selections were made arbitrarily. If I am wrong, Gather needs to show exactly how each entry finished and how the "adjustments" were done.
2. The site, itself, was a train wreck. Many of my friends, family and associates wasted much time trying to register, then trying to vote while glitches in the site prevented them from doing so. I lost nearly 30 votes due to this mess.
3. Like some of the others above, I am disgusted at the venomous level of vitriol allowed to flourish in the comments. While I do not expect Gather to be able to control the bitter outpourings of weak-minded people with small souls, there should be some kind of accountability. While my entry had harmless comments for the most part, I saw other comments from self-proclaimed "experts" (fresh from a Creative Writing 101 course or a workshop) that were not only completely wrong in their assessment, but bitter and hateful. Evidently this is what happens when competitors are allow to be the judges in a contest, an extremely flawed idea.
On the plus side, because of the contest, my manuscript is now in the hands of a New York agent, so I do not regret my participation. I will, however, not recommend this contest to anyone unless major changes are made.
I didn't see your remarks, because they weren't up when I wrote mine.
If you hadn't been there to announce this new contest, I wouldn't have responde at all to this new contest. The first attempt by Gather was enough for me to leave the rest of the Gather messages languishing unread in my Juke Mail.
Also, votes 1-5 should be eliminated. An unliked piece normally would not get read past the first paragaph, and the reader would not vote at all, unless for a malicious reasons.
I think without changes sufficient for the writers' to feel confident about the system, I doubt a new contest would attract many entries.
As for the comment/rating issue. There were many articles upon which everything I would have said had already been said, and so I didn't comment, but I did leave a rating. I don't think that barring people from leaving commentless ratings is the way to go, but there should be an accountability somehow. When I did comment, it was usually rather extensive, so I also ran out of time to leave meaningful comments toward the end of the contest (this problem could also be resolved by a process similar to the one I described above).
I agree with whomever said that the early submissions were left out of the later rounds and I think a lack of knowledge of the contest partially had something to do with that, as well as the limited number of readers at that time.
It also may be helpful for someone at Gather to screen the entries for lack of editing. There were a few manuscripts that I could barely read (and a couple that I couldn't) because they either hadn't been edited (or had been poorly edited). If those submissions could be returned to the writers for further editing before they were posted that would ease the burden on many of the readers to try and determine the meaning of a badly formed sentence/paragraph/chapter.
All that said, as long as there are some improvements I would be willing to take a shot at reading through another batch of submissions.
You and Kerry make valid points.
Gather is a great site for providing a place for writers to exhibit their talents. There are many good writers posting a variety of outstanding articles for our consumption daily. It's a place where we make friends with others who share our interests. While there are many good reasons for Gather... running a contest is not one of them ... at least not the way the last First Chapters was administered.
It was disheartening to hear the comment of Tom Gerace, Gather CEO during the last contest when he said, "Is life fair? No. Is this contest fair? No." Perhaps there is some measure of truth in that comment! However, entrants in a contest need to know that the contest sponsors are striving for some measure of fairness in judging their work for it's quality content. A blatant, up-front announcement that fairness may be absent is a deterrant and Tom needs to make some clarification about that.
We learned that Gather was overwhelmed with many more entries than was anticipated in the prior contest. We were empathetic with the problems stemming from that. We also saw technical difficulties which did not allow Gather to control the raters that assaulted entries for the sole purpose of reducing/raising an article rating unfairly. Future entrants would need to know how Gather plans to correct this.
The failure of Gather to respond to communication attempts throughout the last contest was further frustrating. Entrants were begging for explanations of issues and answers to questions that never came. Emails, IMs, phone calls were ignored. Some type of a reliable liaison with the participants would be an improvement in any future contest.
Gather has heard from us. Our complaints, our suggestions. Through all of this, they could not have missed seeing our support, by the fact that we are still here giving of our time and talent to make Gather even better.
I suggest a split system with a fixed panel of a dozen experts providing a vote and comments worth half the score and readers the other half. The readers must not be multiple logons and all must provide at least a one hundred word commentary that makes some sense. The comments and scoring needs to be overseen.
I very much appreciated the thoughtful constructive reviewers but there were few of these and far more anonymous reviewers.
There has to be a way to control the drive-by's. Their votes are not only hurtful, but also destroy the integrity of the contest.
There should be categories of stories. Most people will not attempt to sort through 1800 chapters to find the type of read they like.
Also, the site should be improved to make it easier for a person to find particular stories.
While I can't share too much about our upcoming announcement, I can respond as follows:
As we have stated in the past, the First Chapters competition exceeded our wildest expectations. First Chapters was a first of a kind competition, anywhere. Gather created an opportunity for aspiring writers to compete for a guaranteed publishing contract with Simon & Schuster (one of the world's most respected publishers) with guaranteed distribution through the Borders retail store network. Never before did aspiring writers have the opportunity to be selected by their peers to become published by a major publishing house along with guaranteed retail distribution. The program captured the imagination of the national media with coverage by the NY Times, CNN and hundreds of papers around the world. As a result of the concept and the media coverage, aspiring writers responded. And, as the competition grew in reputation, more and more people submitted their manuscripts.
Through three rounds of voting, the competition was narrowed to five finalists. This selection process was achieved by a combination of member voting and editorial selection. In the end, Simon & Schuster decided that they would publish two novels instead of one, as a testament to the quality of many of the submissions.
The competition generated tremendous excitement throughout the publishing world. Despite the competition's growing pains and the many lessons we have learned, the Gather community played a strategic role in changing how books are published.
And we did learn many lessons. We received tremendous feedback and constructive guidance from members and participants. We've spent months reviewing our notes and reviewing our operational and logistical guidelines. We've also significantly upgraded our architecture and infrastructure in anticipation of the site activity. So, as Gather launches additional competitions in the future, you can count on significantly improved processes.
I agree with Patrick's comments and most of the others I have read here. Please allow me to expand on them and to offer some solutions.
The submissions should be pre-screened by a panel of perhaps twenty judges. Instructors who teach Freshman Composition should read each piece and judge it for grammar, literacy and understandability. That "grade" should be posted with the original posting.
The submissions should be posted longer so more people get a chance to read and comment.
There should be a way for people to "subscribe" and have the chapters emailed to them so they can read "off line" and then upload their comments.
I feel strongly that categories are important.
You might wish to reach out to other publishers to participate.
Having your work published is the "brass ring" but there are some other opportunities that you may not have considered. Works that may not be suitable for the kind of investment a full hard copy print run merits could well be suitable for ebook distribution. Perhaps as a second level prize, Gather, in cooperation with an ebook publisher, could publish all of the top twenty or so authors who wished to have their works distributed in this manner. The investment in the distribution of an ebook is much less than in the distribution of a hard copy.
The novella idea has merit especially when we are looking at ebook distribution.
While my submission took its share of "drive by hits" some of the comments were valid and I have edited it to correct those issues.
If you do intend to run the contest again, please give me some warning, Both of my current works in progress are sitting in publisher slush piles and I will need to create something from scratch.
Perhaps a fantasy novella would be just the ticket...
Keep us informed.
You say: "Never before did aspiring writers have the opportunity to be selected by their peers to become published by a major publishing house along with guaranteed retail distribution."
We say: They still haven't, either.
Fact: a pre-selected winner, with 1,800/2,600, about 99.999%, not getting proper/fair evaluation?
Fact: the best manuscripts never rose to the top....because they were purposely shot down.
You are still not listening/hearing; or, just want to whitewash things over and re-write history. Either way, still not working...... If I don't 'buy it' others don't either. Stop trying to paint pretty pictures, and get real....please. For everyone's sake. THEN, people will rally behind you and make Gather a real success.
Where is the contrition? "I am sorry we treated people so poorly; it won't ever happen again." "We are committed to respecting the efforts of the writers/entrants." "We don't consider you krill for 'higher level' food chain use."
How about: "We are sorry so many people were hurt, and will do everything in our power to make all things transparent.....so no doubt of our intentions can even be assumed."
How about: "I feel"...statements? (sorry for sounding like your therapist, but jeezz where is the human in there?)
Totally independently, a bunch of people concur up above in the comments (a minor miracle in itself) that Gather screwed with people's lives/reputations/careers through contributory negligence, if not malfeasance; and you dance around spouting off platitudes of what this means for business/exposure (hint, statements like: "The competition generated tremendous excitement throughout the publishing world.")
Read my lips: We don't give a flying f*ck about 'changing the world' when the actions of Gather agents trashed ours. Is it sinking in yet?
While upbeat and 'promising,' your comments seem to reflect further denial of reality. What do people have to do to break through that wall of ego? How many have tried, and given up? Its time to make amends....Then move forward. If only in sincere words.
I'm not sure how to say it clearer.....but this is a defining 'moment' for Gather and Gather admin....what would you rather be? A bloated Simon, like on "Idol?" Or maybe a Dick Clark? He jump-started many careers on "Band Stand." Even a "Star Search" Ed McMahon would be admirable.
You have to give something, before you keep taking people's life work....and prostituting it out, with the 'consolation' of free coffee cards.
Gather has to provide a reason for people to release years of work.....we aren't a bunch of Sanjayas; so desperate for attention, needy, and talentless. Stop misreading our sincerity & vulnerability as being simple. While many folks have given you blunt hints, drawing on lifetimes of experience; you blow them off with trite remarks about "First Chapters competition exceeded our wildest expectations," totally ignoring what 50 people just told you about how insensitive that statement is....... treating us like morons; insulting our intelligence by expecting we'd just believe your words and not the reality we lived. We lived it, maybe that's it. You didn't. Maybe when you write a book you will 'get it.'
You want to 'revolutionize publishing?' Great. But you need talented writers. Want brass tacks? If thats all you 'hear' then SOBe it. YOU HAVE TO BE HUMAN, SINCERE, AND NICE TO EVER GET PEOPLE TO PARTICIPATE AGAIN....not just the 1,800 who were scammed, any others. Because the 'rep' Gather has now is nothing like you paint.....its based on the fact of over 1,800 talented and qualified people being trashed. And you have the audacity to rub people's faces in the shit of your propaganda...."The best won; you are shit....and we keep driving that point home," is what I hear between the lines. You have to extricate yourselves from that ivory tower of Babel, that "Twilight Zone" of self-reinforcing "La La Land," to see the writing on the wall....if you want to really succeed in life and business. The best did not win. The best never even made it through to the final 20. Yes, some deserving authors did work their way through.....with lots of support from many of us. But we all know that the best were intentionally buried....for whatever reasons. Its hard enough for good folks to cope with that; without having lies continually thrown up to defend negligence. You are driving away those of us that hang around despite your behaviors.....hoping against the odds, that insight will shine its way through. What do we get in return? Flagged articles. More hidden drive-bys. Suppression of articles. Yet some of us persist....because we do understand what can be achieved.....even your wild dreams....IF. IF you wake up, make amends, and pull people together; rather than promoting divisiveness and king-building. People succeed because others want them too.....you have to convince others that you deserve support, that you will respect them and their work.
Again, please just clear the air....be real....and people will support you.
If you don't 'hear' this, I give up on the idea that you will hear anything you don't want to hear. We have been beating up Tom G, but the ethical cancer has another source. Show us that it isn't you. Sorry, but that's the best 'hint'/advice I can give you.
Good luck....
:-)
Canned form responses aside, I'm assuming you really are real people who want to see Gather succeed. Now's your chance. Don't miss it. You never know when it's your last.
American Idol works because people vote for what they like.... no one can give a singer a 0 to bring thier rating down. They call a number and it is registered as a vote.
Is there no way to make it that simple? "click here to vote for this story" kind of thing?
People can still leave thier nasty comments or praises in the comment section of the article. I was the victim of wht was come to be known as "drive by ratings" designed to trash a story. This was done by friends and family and other authors who wanted to stack the deck in thier favor.
There is no doubt that there were problems with my story and I did appreciate the ones who gave constructive criticism. But to leave a 0 with no reason left in the comments is just a cowards way of fixing the vote.
If you do take my suggestion then this is no longer an issue and people can get genuinely fair contest.
I also think it would be great to have a celebrity author join the panel... sometimes they might recognize raw talent in someone that the publishers might miss. Maybe they can even give helpful suggestions?
Even though my experience wasn't the greatest, I am a hopeful person who will take advantage of any opportunity that comes my way. I'd like to know if we can submit the same story again.
I was told by an agent that once a story was published on a website that publishers won't touch it. So anyone who is writing a story on Gather and gives the complete works here loses first rights to it.
Can someone clear this up as well? Since Simon and Schuster was on the panel and might know something about the subject. If this is true there are currently a great number of writers being done a great injustice by publishing thier works here.
What do you mean by the winner having been "pre-selected"?
It was a mistake to use the existing Gather infrastructure to run this contest. I believe there are computer programmers out there just itching to make a program that would make such a contest fair and simple.
But the American Title contest has produced three winners to date, is gearing up for the Fourth Season AND has purchased other finalists. You might want to touch base with these folks, Carl. It's worked pretty well. And all 10 chosen finalists' manuscripts are publish-worthy, because Dorchester guarantees publication by whichever one wins.
American Title Contest
more info on my website: Judi Fennell
I did, however, read and rate hundreds of entries. I was solicted by authors who thought I was being fair, and had something useful to offer them. I'm still being solicited to read their revisions, sometimes their entire manuscripts. And yet, there are those of you here who want to cut me out of the process entirely.
Not one of you has mentioned that there were also prizes for the most insightful comment on the *winning* entries. This drove a lot of readers, like me, to read only the highest rated articles. What was the point of spending 20-30 minutes *per article*, reading and offering input, if there was no chance it would move on? Flaw one was the prize should have been given for the comment alone, whether or not the chapter moved on in the competition. However, considering the comment count had to be in the hundreds of thousands, no one could have read them all to judge them.
C.H. suggests that only entrants be allowed to rate. NO. This is precisely what led to problems. The exact opposite is true. Entrants should be allowed to comment, but NOT rate their competition. This is what led to the drive by vandalism of works. Other guy getting ahead of you? You and your buds go hit him with a bunch of ones.
Cutting the non-entrant reader out also eliminates just what you are all looking for. The end consumer of your product. The purchaser of your books. At least one top five finalist is currently including the fact that he already has a built in fan base in his query letter. He got that fan base by being personable, honest, reaching out to form connections, being supporive of other authors, etc. That's smart marketing.
And for those of you who resented, or were reluctant to solicit readers? Guess what? That's how the real world works. Think you deliver your book to the publisher and they do all the marketing for you? Not in today's marketplace. A publisher is going to be asking you about your marketing plan, about your speaking 'platform'. What can you bring to the table that is going to help sell your books? Unless you're Stephen King, you're going to be doing the lion's share of your own marketing. Better learn to do it here. You have to sell yourself as much as your manuscript.
And if you are rude, obnoxious, or ugly here on the internet, to other authors, and especially to your potential audience, readers, that's gonna stick with you, and publishers aren't going to be thrilled to take on someone who's ugly reputation lives on forever on the world wide web.
All that said, I made a lot of good friends here, every single one of them with a First Chapters entry. And they don't mind that I'm just a reader.
I didn't keep track of this, so I could be wrong, but I think that the alter ego allowances started after the First Chapters ended or nearly ended. That will be a new phenomenon to watch in the next series if some serious changes aren't made. Should be a hoot!
(1) Because it quickly became obvious that at least several hundred if not thousands of people were competing for 20 slots. That drastic of a bottleneck so early in the contest led to a lot of the problems the contest faced. If the first round had eliminated half or two-thirds, or even eighty percent of the contestants the competition would have been a lot less nasty at that level because there wouldn't have been as much of the horrendous feeling that anyone good could cost you one of those 20 slots.
(2) The structure of the contest meant that after the first two weeks hundreds of contestants were sitting there with their viewing period finished and no way to influence their fate other than down-rating other contestants. If you have have people sitting on the sidelines that are competing against people in the contest, you will have drive-bys or some form of down-rating competitors. If you are going to limit viewing periods, it would be wise to break the contest down into a series of sub=contests with people chosen to go on based on their ranking within their sub-contest. That removes much of the incentive for drive-bys.
I've also mentioned earlier the possibility of rewarding socially useful conduct such as commenting on other entries, forming friendships, joining Groups groups, etc. elsewhere. You already have a mechanism for that in Gather points. That shouldn't become the main factor in deciding winners, but it should be allowed to make a difference in the early round(s), possibly with a small percentage of people going on to later rounds based on Gather points earned during the competition period.
It would probably be useful if Gather thought through the structure of the contest from the point of view of contestants. "If I was in this situation, what would make it more likely that I would win?" and then "Does that behavior make it more or less likely that (a)publishable stuff will come out of the contest, and (b) a strong, long-term group or writers will be attracted to Gather." If some part of structure of the contest gives incentives for undesirable behavior, it may be possible to change that part of the structure.
In any case, while I was generally happy with what I got out of the contest, I share some of the frustrations that Patrick and others have expressed. At the same time, it is strongly in Gather's self-interest as an organization to solve or minimize some of the problems we saw last time, so I suspect that they will do their best to do so.
I'm looking forward to seeing how this next version of the contest works out.
Round one was very troubling last time around. There are a number of ways this could be addressed. You could have a contest for specific genres or even age groups of writers (writers 17 and under or writers 60 and older). That would decompress the competition some. I believe Round 2 is when the cream of the crop really starts to rise. It's too easy for good work to be overlooked in the first round.
I'd also like to see the contest opened up to people outside of the United States.
Also, I was curious as to when we will hear more about the contest. When will it be? Can you give us a time estimate? Or maybe a clue as to who is going to be the next publishing house in on the competition.