If you wrote the one I think you wrote then I'll agree with you. Yours is in my top four, I am almost positive. I won't venture a guess simply for the sake of anonymity.

I think my original post (earlier, above) was written incorrectly It should be something to the effect of, "There are two reasons why someone would want to vote for themselves, either to be spiteful or because their entry is in their opinion better than the rest."

I agree. I like the idea of actually writing something great and making people feel compelled to vote for it because they liked it. That doesn't mean mine will be the best because there are many here who do better by leaps and bounds.

I read them all because I am genuinely curious. I want that person to know what in particular I didn't like so they can improve, or completely ignore my advice and keep trudging along.

I think I will pick and choose which entries I read so my vote will truly be deciding whose story was better. It's a bit like pineapplelovers did a few CAWs back. They look for the writers they love and exclude the rest. Quite a promising premise to follow.

 

I received a PM with a question regarding my comments in this recent competition and felt that a portion of that request actually deserved a public response.

Some who take the time to read what I write (have written in the past) in critiques will realize that I try to avoid writing negative comments where I cannot counter those with positive remedies. Those who note the above may also notice a lack of participation in my comments recently.

The stories presented in this competition are of a quality which leaves me with little to critique. There are stories which I did not fully enjoy but I cannot say how much of that is due to my personal (emotional and mental real life issues at this time) and how much is due to a non-quantifiable lack of satisfaction with a story as presented.

I am seriously thinking of not voting due to my emotional state at this time but IF I do, my vote would be based, not on what I feel is the prime issue in these competitions: the quality of the writing, but instead purely on how fully I was able to get submerged into a story. There was one story which was a fun diversion but which will not get my vote because of the depth of emotion in others. There are other stories which would not get my vote due to the story's inability to draw me more than just surface deep into itself. NONE of these stories have a lack in quality but there is currently a lack within me which needs to escape into an emotional whirlpool and the limited number of those stories in this competition make me a very biased voter.

I apologize to all who submitted for my lack. :rose:

 

Do not worry about the quality of writing so much as how you enjoyed the story. The quality of a story could be absolutely great but have all of the entertainment value of a dead fly. A story of lesser quality may well draw you in and make you beg for more. Of the two I would vote for the second.

My reason is simple, technical manuals may be very well written but they don't have any creativity. The art of writing a story is about being creative. The grammar and punctuation are all about technical expertise. If the two are together than the story goes from good to phenomenal.

I would not discount a story for a few mistakes in grammar or spelling. I will discount a story instantly if I do not want to read it because it has no entertainment value. You read with the mind you enjoy with the heart. In the end only your heart gets to vote.

 

You've alluded to as much elsewhere. I wouldn't blame you if you didn't feel right voting because of it. The lack within you supersedes everything else. I genuinely hope that things turn out alright for you and what you're going through.

I like the last part a lot.

Many stories are able to endure through grammar/spelling errors. I think there was an entry the last time around, it involved a hike up a snowy mountain. Most of us know that snow is cold so that explains itself.

Entertainment is a very interesting thing. The difficulty of expressing humor in a written medium has been broached, though I think scaring someone is much easier to do, at least as far as stories go. Love, too has it's own variations. Some cultures express their feelings in different ways. Some people mate for life, many choose to have as many partners as they wish to, neither see anything wrong with what they've been taught or chose of their own freewill to do.

I could go on at length about this but I'm not looking to bore anyone. I feel like I'm going off on a tangent and that isn't my goal.

 

A writer's ability or willingness to follow the basic rules of written English has always been important to me, but it matters so little in this CAW that it's a non-issue.

For some reason, I tend to visualize as I read. A lot of these stories allowed me to do that -- immerse myself in the scenes and get to know the characters. I like a well thought out plot, and if it misleads and surprises me, all the better.

Like others said, a story has to "involve" me. If I can identify with one of the characters, or if their personality/appearance/mannerisms become clear in my mind, that's a huge plus.

The problem here is that most of the stories this time did most of those things well.

Which is why I'm glad we'll have till June 9th to vote.

 

Hey Yall official last day of the reading phase.
get ready to vote
remember you will have plenty of time to vote.

 

Glad you posted "Official" last day as many can still read and vote before the last voting day & time.
So if you haven't, do so if interested.

 

Right. CAW SOP will post a "Voting Phase" thread some time on June 1st, and you'll have through the 9th to vote -- two weekends included to make it easier.

That should give you enough time to read all thirteen entries at least once, and hopefully review them thoroughly enough to make your decisions.

Remember, each member gets two votes, so you don't have to choose a single favorite story. If you're having trouble whittling down your list (like me) pick two different criteria for "the best entry". Maybe one story will top all the others in one area, while another story seems like the best choice in another. Vote for both.

 

This is the hardest caw ever!

I still have a few to read and my short list isn't any shorter than the reading list!

God damn it, why do y'all need to be such good story tellers? Making it hard for us readers/voters.

The stories I have read have been of exemplary standards, and I am sure the remaining stories will be exactly the same if not better. Such a hard life having to read such good stories. Lol.

I am glad we have 9 days to vote as it may take that long to choose but I CANNOT wait to find out who wrote what, and see the random guessing game. Should be hilarious to see who guesses what and whom wrote what.

Happy voting peeps.

 

Guessing game clues.

To help those of you who are intent on figuring out who wrote what, here are some hints:

There are more entries than entrants.

I didn't write anything.

Contrary to rumor, ejls did not submit a story.

Horypixy wasn't involved in any of the tales you have to choose from.

People entered this time who didn't write a story last time.

At least one person is a CAW newb.​

There. That should make it easy.

 

I think I have one of the authors figured out by title and because of the section markers in the story.

 

Oh yeah! I know who wrote all the stories now....

You narrowed it down so much for us that it's not a challenge now.

Spoil sport...

NOT!!!

%-) :grin: :roll: %-)

 

Hey! What do you want from me? Everything I wrote is true. ejls told me herself that she did not have a new idea for a story this time, and believe it or not, she apparently does more than just write erotic romance fiction for this site.

I know. Shocked me too.

 

I wonder if there's some message in here we should pay attention to.

 

No. That's been in my sig for years. Everything word I wrote is true and accurate.





This time.

 

Could I have that in English, please?
(no more posting until you finish your morning coffee)

Let's analyze your claims.

Sorry, but I mistrust this. It seems to be a contradictory statement. I mean, someone writing the message "I didn't write anything" throws my bullshit-o-meter into the danger zone.
It also could be meant literally, and you didn't write anything- you typed it instead. Which would make this a statement made with the intent to mislead.

Yet, she could have co-authored a work, and the other person submitted it. Which would make this a statement made with the intent to mislead.

Let's just assume that's a typo in her name and you meant hornypixy. But even so, isn't she one of the CAW SOPs? Which means she was involved in every tale. After all, aren't the SOPs the people who posted them to the forum? Or, perhaps you spelled the name that way on purpose, in which case this was a statement made with the intent to mislead.

These could be saying the same thing. The implication is that there are at least two people who were in previous CAWs other than CAW 15, that are in this one, and there is also at least one person in the CAW for the first time ever.
However, if there were two brand new CAW authors this time, the conditions of those two statements would also be met.
The first statement can also be interpreted different ways. Since authors are allowed to collaborate on stories, you can claim that neither author, when considered separately from their partner, wrote a story. Again, I would file this under "statements meant to mislead" but on the other hand, it wouldn't be fair to give one author credit for a joint work. You also word it as "people entered" which is quite different from phrasing in prior claims like "the tales you have to choose from" which means it's possible someone entered, but the CAW SOPs didn't post the story for some reason. Then this entire claim is technically true, but worthless. You're also comparing apples to oranges. How do you know? How do you know that a person who entered this time didn't write a story last time? Those are two different things. It's quite possible they did write a story last time, but never submitted it.
The second statement could be there just to mislead us entirely. It says one person is a CAW newb, not that one writer is a CAW newb. Perhaps you mean that someone who posted a comment on a story is a newb?
Normally I wouldn't look so closely at these two, but with at least two earlier claims that I do not believe, it makes me question all the claims.

So yeah, I consider your claims in that post to be of doubtful veracity. I fully expect that the claims you made there were made with the intent to mislead us. Which is the definition of a lie. Why would I believe something that is likely a lie?

 

I can vouch for that. WSF did not say anything that's not true.

1) There are indeed more stories than entrants
2) There is at least one newb.
3) Ejls really didn't submit a story.
4) There might be a 'back on popular demand' entrant from previous CAWs
5) Although WSF have discussed and done some preliminary work on a non-entry, we simply didn't have time to complete it. It's in our unfinished shit folders. We plan to finish it, though. When we have time. Like, in December.

 

This part means the following are hints.

More entries than entrants is alluding to the presence of stories written by teams.

He didn't write one of the aforementioned stories.

Ejls didn't submit one of the aforementioned stories.

Hornypixy wasn't involved in any of the aforementioned stories.

People entered this time who didn't write a story last time.

At least one person's entry among the aforementioned stories was written by a CAW newb.

I don't see how any of this was unclear.

 

More than that. If it's true, it means that a minimum of at least two people submitted as part of a team and also submitted solo stories.

That's not what he said. He said he didn't write anything. "Anything" encompasses much more than just the stories.

Again, this does not preclude the possibility of her co-authoring a story, and the co-author being the one to actually submit the story.
You also changed the wording of the statement. With how you've worded it, it would be possible for her to have submitted a solo effort and a joint effort. (she didn't submit one story, she submitted two)

Straight-up incorrect. At the very minimum, she was involved in the posting of one story. As a SOP, did she not also participate in determining the theme of the CAW? Then she was involved in all stories.

Again, you can't know that. There is a difference between submitting and writing. It's entirely possible that someone wrote a story last time, but did not submit it for some reason.

Again something you can't be sure of. WSF pointed out in another thread that some people have multiple accounts. You can't know that a "new" author isn't actually an experienced author using a different account.
Would that violate the spirit (and maybe rules) of the contest? Sure, but that doesn't mean it didn't happen.

 

Wow. When will I learn to not post?

Fine. My post had several typos. You were right about the coffee.

Saying there are more entries than entrants could mean there's a single team entry. It could also mean there are six team stories and one solo effort. There may even be an entry that had ten names on it.

When I said I didn't write, I meant I didn't create an entry. Pixy couldn't either, and we would not have been able to write a partnership story. Against the rules.

Not sure how my statement about ejls got construed to mean she wrote a partnership story, two partnership stories, or one solo and one partnership entry. I'm not that good at puzzles.

As far as people losing their CAW cherry is concerned, that could mean that someone who's been a member for years their first story. It could also mean there's a legitimately new member who submitted.

We know the writers. There don't appear to be any sock entries.

Everything I typed and submitted as part of the discussion of the identity of writers has been true. You'll see that when the identities are revealed.

Sheesh. :excited: