Now that the dust has settled on the last challenge I thought it might be a good time to explore some of the issues with them that seem to be causing a degree of controversy and to do so starting with a blank page as it were rather than by responding specifically to previous comments on the forum.
There seem to be two main areas to look at, the first being in regards to what we intended to achieve with the challenges and the second being a discussion of why we think the current way of doing them is the best way to go about it.
Once the voting has completed on the challenges the details can be seen on a separate standalone web page (http://www.spankinglibrary.tk/challenges/) which is visible to both site members and guests alike, although you need to be logged in to read the actual stories. The main page of the standalone site explains that:
"The purpose of the challenges is to stimulate existing, and potential, authors into creating new works of spanking fiction, to provide a means whereby readers can participate by being able to cast votes on the entries, and most importantly, simply to have a bit of fun."
So, our intention was to "challenge" authors to write works based on something that was presented to them and that's how we hoped it would be perceived. I noted numerous references on the forum to the "competition" and of course it's natural that some will see it in that light irrespective of whatever alternative spin we try and put on it. I'll explain later why I believe that viewing it in that light is something of a pointless exercise.
On the other side of the fence we thought that it would be good to let the readers participate by letting them cast their votes on what they'd read. From conversing with users of the site the impression I get in general is that most people do seem to enjoy being able to place their votes. The alternative, which I'm personally very much not in favour of, is to appoint some panel of 'experts' and let them decide on the outcome.
OK, so the above outlines our intentions and now I'd like to look at why I believe the alternatives, at least in terms of the voting process, are not worth pursuing. There's been a great deal of debate about how the votes should be counted, the whole premise of which is based on ignoring our stated intention for the challenges, but as I've already noted that's the nature of things and we might as well consider what's being said. I've already explained why an "average" vote is no improvement over a total vote count but really all the arguments about how to score the voting are irrelevant as there are a large number of other variables which have a MUCH greater effect on the outcome:
1. Criteria No criteria are actually specified for how the entries should be judged so one assumes that many will be voting purely on how much they personally 'enjoyed' what they read. I see nothing wrong with that but at the same time we need to recognise it's a totally subjective measure. Others may be voting based on what they perceive to be the literary merit of the entry and yet others may be using a combination of the two. Even if we were to try and get people to vote solely on literary merit, I'm sure there would be little, if any, agreement as to how that should be determined. It doesn't need saying that critics are very often not in agreement and there are rarely any 'absolutes' to be found. The bottom line is that we have no set criteria for judging nor do I think we want any as it's not in keeping with our intentions for the challenges not to mention impractical.
2. Ability to judge Even if a carefully defined set of criteria for judging each challenge was outlined, you then have to consider how capable everyone is at being able to put those into practice. And the reality is that it's going to vary enormously to the extent that it will soon become apparent that trying to go down this route, where potentially the whole readership is involved, is pointless.
3. Preferred content It's well known that certain entries will be favoured based on the spanking orientation, gender, age etc that they feature. For example, writers of F/M fiction are going to be at a huge disadvantage. We could try and tackle this by having a whole range of sub-divisions within the challenges for the various categories but that seems messy, fragmented and fraught with difficulties.
4. All or none Another huge problem is that, as shown by the statistics I've produced in the past, not everyone who votes bothers to do so on all the entries. In addition, I'm sure some authors share the details of their entry with others who then vote only for those and ignore the rest. Other entrants may decide to only vote on their own submissions or give low marks to those they regard as competition. Without turning the whole thing into something incredibly tedious I think you simply have to accept that the majority of voters are not going to vote on every submission, whether it's because some of them simply aren't their cup of tea, are too long, don't have a whizzy title, or they don't have enough time to read them all, or any number of other reasons. Trying to impose a system whereby only the votes from voters who have voted on EVERY entry get to count will be largely unwelcome not to mention pointless as someone could simply vote for the few stories they wanted to vote on and blanket vote 1 for the rest or something equally unhelpful.
There are a number of other factors involved but the four above have a FAR greater impact then whatever convoluted algorithm we might come up with in regards to how the votes should be counted. The only conclusion that can be drawn, assuming one ignores the intent behind the challenges in the first place, is that there is no way of implementing some objective, totally fair, method of voting and once you arrive at that conclusion then I would assume you have to accept that the original intentions are sound.
Putting the voting to one side, I think there are several positive reasons for entering and enjoying the challenges, including the focus of attention on what you've written, the comments you receive (it's clear that challenge entries pick up more comments than routine story submissions), the possibility of finding new readers who hadn't read your work before, and so forth.
Lastly, despite all the debate, my understanding is that the challenges as they are, are enjoyed by the majority, provide something to talk about, result in some of us getting to read things we wouldn't have otherwise, produce a batch of new spanking fiction and allow us to celebrate the diverse styles of the various authors. Hopefully, we'll have another one or two later in the year. |