Hello admin bods and fellow writers.

I had a thought about the Top Ten...If you look at Toast and Snagglefoot (for example), they have both been in the Top Three for a good proportion of this month. Now, it is possible that even if they are still there on March 31st, come April 1st they could be suddenly knocked out right at the last minute.

My question is this - is it really fair to say that whoever is in the Top 3 on the first of the month should get the crits? Isn't this a bit arbitrary. Would it be fairer to award the crits to whoever has spent the most time in the Top 3 in the previous month?

As I have no chance of getting the crit this month (or ever probably ) whichever method is used, I can claim total impartiality in making this suggestion!

What do others think?

HJW
Are you hooked?

Oh blogger

I think that's a point well made. I'm pretty sure though that I've read in other threads that "they who must be obeyed" are already planning to extend crits and (doubtless) cherished places on the best-seller list to cover just this eventuality.

Right now that's probably fairest as it's always bad to change the rules mid-competition, but I agree it would be a shame for Toast (must read it) and Snagglefoot (already have) to miss out now. www.keithmansfield.co.uk
johnnymackintosh.com

Johnny Mackintosh and the Spirit of London was published by Quercus on 3 July 2008

HJW, that would still mean that storys that have been around longer will do better purely doe to longevity, after all, they are unlikly to drop their rating much are they? Plus it encourages the more competative minded to keep their stuff up and credited rather than going ahead with a rewrite.

Any ranking system inevitably brings out the competitor in people, which in turn leads to the concern being rank rather than improving. Trust me on this one, if theres an exploitable loophole, someone will exploit it.

K. Cheer Up! Tommorow will be worse

Hello All

It's a fine balance. The Top Ten is about accessibility as well. Many members get reviews very quickly. Some don't have as much time as others and toting up 5 reviews can take longer. The function whereby those with longevity in the Top Ten will go the Best Sellers Chart, even if they never reach the Top Three, will help to recognise more writers. The Best Sellers Chart will look at a more sustained level of reviews.

As mentioned in the thread below, part of the Best Sellers Chart aim will be that the good writing of one book benefits another e.g. if someone likes one set of chapters, it aims to encourage them to peruse others. We see many constructive reviews and the aim is to encourage a constructive culture which sees that this is the best way forward. Not to get too Zen, but perhaps a simple analogy in terms of how it is best to see fellow writers as collaborators rather than competitors, would be to imagine someone going into a bookshop and seeing one author has deliberate put a lot of shoddy books around his own in order to highlight himself as the best one. More likely what would happen is the browser would chance on one of the many bad books and not get to the good one, not come back. Whereas if the shelves are stacked with good books, the browser is more likely to peruse others and return. The analogy applies to what constructive reviewing can help to achieve for everyone’s writing. The next development stage will be taking place over the coming weeks to help achieve this.

Ted

http://www.youwriteon.com/forum/YouWriteOn--The-Charts-Topic-981-1.aspx

You're always so reasonable Ted!

I like your Zen type analogy.

Thanks for all the good work you admin guys are doing. The site seems to be getting better and better and some of the writing really is top notch. Are you hooked?

Oh blogger