BardStephenFox said:
Personally, I preferred the comments to be in-thread with the stories. It helped keep the thread a little more dynamic as the contest played out. Besides comments on storywriting are fun and interesting to everyone, Judges, Authors and Spectators.
I also think a single thread would be healthier for the tournament. The commentary thread is still hard to find, it's far easier to just post a comment after you read a story than go out and search for the "other damn thread". Maybe people could be asked to post story commentary in spoilers or spoiler blocks?
The way it is now, you also have two threads of discussion going on, general writing and tournament discussion there (and here), story-specific things here, and you don't want to repeat yourself... I actually think that's part (but not all) of the reasons why it's so quiet.
I have also voiced concerns that when we bumped the contest from 8 competitors/3 rounds, to 16 competitors/4 rounds, we started asking a little too much from the Judges. We went from 14 stories to be judged to 30 stories to be judged. It is a lot to ask for, essentially, volunteer work. Perhaps Berandor or Mythago would be kind enough to give a judge's perspective on the time it takes to judge.
Of course, that is a relative issue. Some stories are easier to judge & comment on. I find that when we have good stories paired off against each other, it takes longer. I think that is a good thing since it does mean we have good stories to read.
But there are drawbacks to that. Good stories with disparate writing styles are even more difficult to judge against.
That's another reason. The amount of stories has grown, and (to me) the tournament just takes too long. With 8 contestants, you always had 2 alternates, you had a tighter schedule. Alright, people didn't get into the line-up frequently (I tried three times, I believe), but then again, you didn't have to wait a week before finally getting the last contestant ready, and then two dropping out (me included).
Judging would be easier with 8 contestants, too - 16 stories is just a lot, and takes at least 16 weekdays to do (on average). I know I'd need a whole evening per story, normally, but I'd read it, read it again, and then read it again and make my comments. And then write my judgement. I probably did too much, but that'd take a few hours, I'd say 3. When commenting on stories, it usually only takes one reading, and I'd read the story again as I'd be writing my comments.
Finally, you have a harder time recruiting spectators. First, those 8 people that didn't get in, are already motivated for the contest, and might read and comment. Second, when someone interested takes a look at the contest, even in round 1 there are 16 stories to read, more than in a whole tournament with 8 contestants (8+4+2 = 14)
But I reall think the contest lasts too long. It loses momentum that way, if from start to finish we need 2 months, especially since it's very hard to plan for 8 weeks of spare writing time (or judging time). The earlier contests were done in 3 weeks, IIRC, which made for breezier reading. Also, a downtime of 2 months before the next Ceramic DM really gets my interest going for it, whereas now, it seems one is barely over before the new one begins. It starts to lose some of its feeling "special". And I don't think that's good.
On critiquing stories: I think longer stories are harder to judge
What I tried to do was giving useful feedback, as professional as possible, without taking the fun of writing away. It's a hobby contest, after all. Also, the time strain sometimes is extremely obvious, with mistakes in a story that wouldn't be there if the author had had time to proofread once (more). So with the not-so-good stories, I'd see the danger of going overboard, criticizing every small mistake and thereby totally ruining the fun for the author and also because I wouldn't want to put him up as a bad example. If the judgements were via PM, I'd have far less scruples
Also, I'd be careful to include positive comments as well, not only bad ones.
With good stories, on the other hand, I'd have to be careful not to become too nitpicky, making the story worse than it is, or imagining flaws. There's also the problem that sometimes part of the story felt wrong, but I'd be at a loss to put it into words other than "it doesn't work for me". You might have to dig deeper for a good critique when judging a good story, is what's I'm trying to say.
That's me rambling
Edit: Wow. It's quite obvious I'm writing in between invoices at work, isn't it? Sorry for mistakes and stilted speech, I don't have time to correct it right now.
