You'd know a lot about getting everywhere too wouldn't you
You should join us, we could use an expert's input
...
Wasn't aware you were such a dick-eating fanatic :v v: :v v:
OH MY GOD HAHAHAHA NVM I JUST READ THE THING I COULD ALWAYS USE MORE JUBE MAKING AN ASS OF HIMSELF AND DORK FRIENDS HAVING SING-ALONGS You'll notice I made a thread about my comp being in the shop And before you say it mobile skype can eat a dick
HOW DID THIS THREAD GO ON FOR SIX PAGES WHEN IT ENDED RIGHT HERE
They are all Harry Potter now
This all sounds good on paper, but I find the ideal sadly far from the truth, as people will rally votes against somebody they don't like, or just use it as an excuse to trash-talk. And as far as using it as constructive criticism: First off, which is it meant to be, light-hearted or serious? Second, as a serious category it does a poor job; "Worst" is absurdly vague and likely to be no help to the person, unless they ask why which, again, opens the floor to trash talk. This is partially what made me suggest a category like Rudest Member. But even that wasn't in earnest and I won't be miffed if it's rejected, as I believe the awards should remain light-hearted, and categories like these are by design more likely to provoke an argument. As far as self-nominations catering to attention whores... So? If it's meant to be taken seriously then it's still the lesser of two evils, and if it's all in good fun then who cares? We have several categories virtually made for attention whores already. (I WON SEVERAL OF THEM SO CLEARLY I'M A QUALIFIED EXPERT.) This idea of reserving the right to tell somebody that they're the worst out there just smacks of nosiness and pointless aggression imo. The proposed gains are speculative at best, and really I don't see what all the fuss is that you have to wait for somebody to give the go-ahead before you tell them what's wrong with them. My grandma raised me to believe that's just common courtesy, not a back-up plan.
Pff kinda hard to figure out what to call 'em, I've seen punk rock, alt rock, pop punk... They jump around a bit, like most good bands.
She did draw me an apology once Not sure what happened between then and now
Feeling's mutual <3
I'm actually surprised you tolerate me
A MISERABLE LITTLE PILE OF SHRIMP
YOUR WORDS ARE AS EMPTY AS YOUR BARBIE
IT'S THE REINCARNATION OF IMEEM WHO WOULDN'T
excus e x c u s
Well I also think it's too early to judge if people will consistently be offended by the self-nomination version, 'cause yeah it kinda escalated from nothing like Plums said. I think we should give it another try or two to see if that wasn't just a fluke. Anyway, I get the interest in rep (I'm neurotic about what people think of me rofl) but traditionally people get way too into it, and there've been prior accusations of rigging the votes... One's reputation should inform the awards, not the other way around, and I find a lot more of the latter. There's gotta be another way.
Rudest Member Most Obscure Tastes (as in music, games, films, what-have-you) True Neutral (Most Likely to Never Take Sides in an Argument) Don't make me fry you again Then let's stress that people can opt-out if they're uncomfortable, because I know a lot of people won't simply because they fear being judged or ridiculed for it. Gives 'em the impression that if they don't submit themselves to humiliation they'll just be humiliated anyway I'd really rather they remain self-nominated to stress that they're not meant to be taken seriously—anybody who legitimately wants to put a spotlight on someone just 'cause they dislike them really needs to take five and think about their life choices
Psh you just wish you were cool enough to have hangers-on that copy your every move
I find it hard to start with the beginning, because of how much you have to convey at once. You've got to grip the reader immediately, and tell them what to expect in a way; setting up conflict, establishing your narrative voice and enough info about the viewpoint character to hang on to... And I personally prefer to jump right into the action rather than navel-gazing, which adds its own complications. I rarely start with something far in the past, if that's where the cool stuff happened then that should be the present of the story imo. If I do go into flashbacks there's usually a catalyst, like one of the characters recalling their past or presenting it in some tangible way.
