posted 04-04-2001 12:54 AM            

Forget about 'professional' readers for the review process'... instead, unanimous readers, people who are NOT CONTESTANTS!!!

Only 'Members' and 'Reviewers' can actually read scripts and judge them in the review process'...

Wha'dya say TS?, Ben?

posted 04-22-2001 09:04 AM            

quote:

---

Originally posted by debwand:
The contestant reviews were assigned

---

Well, that is not entirely accurate. Supposedly, your script was not to appear in the PGL searchable database until after you had done your own three mandatory reviews and until your script had three "randomly" assigned mandatory reviews done on it.

Many scripts did not get three mandatory reviews.

And I can tell you that of my three "mandatory" reviews done on my script, two were actually solicited by ME on the PGL message boards. How's that for randomly assigned?

It makes me wonder about two things.

1. What would have become of my script if I hadn't been actively soliciting reviews?

2. If that "mechanic" of seeking out my own mandatory reviews was available to me because my script was immediately placed in the searchable database upon uploading it and completing the Personal Review Form, then does that mean that same mechanic of "seeking out favorable reviews" was also available to anyone who wanted to cheat and sign up all their pals and aunts and uncles and cousins to pull up their script and give it rave reviews????

And likewise, would these same roaming bands of "Survivor Wanna-be's" be mowing down the competition, getting their trashing in and having it all count as other writers' mandatories?

Because I can tell you the system here was never in place to do as the rules stated. If anyone else was here at the very beginning, you will recall the numerous javascript errors that plagued this website and its pages.

I guess you can call what happened here a contest, of sorts. But it was a contest of who could cheat the best and it was a contest of who would be lucky enough to slip through the cracks and not get caught up in the trashing but, in my most humble opinion, this was never a contest about finding the best screenplay or the best director.

And having said that, I will say that reviewers whose opinions I trust and respect (like quetee and pickel) are satisfied that at least some of the scripts that progressed here actually did deserve the honor. That's a good thing.

I say the scripts should not be in any searchable database until AFTER ALL ENTERED SCRIPTS HAVE HAD THEIR MANDATORY REVIEWS DONE WITH THOSE REVIEWS BEING RANDOMLY ASSIGNED JUST AS THIS CONTEST PROMISED IT WOULD DO.

True, they also promised that bogus (malicious, trashy, incompetent) reviews would not count and those contestants would be disqualified.

But is anyone still waiting for PGL to live up to its own rules?

And does anyone have any expectation that they will do so in the next round?

Does anyone here think that a contest bears at least a little responsibility for making even minimal effort to enforce its own stated rules?

PEACE,
uhuru1701

posted 04-24-2001 02:43 PM            

I would also recommend that they delete some of the trash that appeared on the last season's boards.

posted 04-30-2001 12:08 AM            

Shit.

Man, if mandatory reviews were not random then there is no weight or integrity here in search of new talent at all.
Thinking... dear, I still find that rant lacking (though I do find fault in the process, correctible fault). I hope every chance is given to entrants in a fair and random peer review. It's who the peers are that concerns me. Liken it to the Olympics - amatuer, not untrained. Qualifying rounds. Basics. Could there possibly be a reviewing force that knows the difference between Setting and Location?
But I don't ascribe to the theory that they screwed us, are screwing us and will continue to screw us. That would be pretty damn dumb. Finding new talent is a prize for people in this Industry. If nothing else why would a movie studio want to piss off a significant and vocal portion of their audience? It don't got legs if it don't got mouth.
Peace to you.
Deb

posted 05-06-2001 09:11 AM            

I got nine reviews. Seven were raves, all extremely high marks (high 90's and 100's). I would imagine that none of them would have kept me from advancing to the 250.

Supposedly, only your mandatories kept you from advancing, right??????

The other two were passes. The one pass was a mistake on the part of the reviewer. She thought "Pass" meant that you were advancing someone. She also gave me all high 90's and 100's, said she would see it in a theater, rated it low budget, and all that good stuff.

If, as many here have claimed, a mere "Pass" or "Recommend" did not mean you advanced or not, but the totality of your points were considered, then this review would also not have kept me from advancing.

This reviewer did seek me out on the boards and say she had made a terrible error and asked Tech Support how to rectify it, but of course, there was no response.

The last review was absolutely the most valuable to me because it was written by someone who had obviously made a study of screenwriting or who was some kind of professional editor or reviewer.

For this review alone, it was worth it to me to have entered PGL.

They also gave me fairly high marks but gave it a "Pass" and this "Pass" is one that means something because I know that they knew exactly what they were doing. They also said they would have marked it "Consider" if that had been an option as it usually is with REAL reviews in the industry.

But in their opinion, it was not quite up to absolute perfection in terms of being ready to roll as a shooting script and so they had to mark it as a "Pass."

And this was most definitely one of the reviews I solicited because I respected this person on the boards and they, in fact, also separately emailed me their review.

That is how I know it was one of my reviews that I went out and found on the boards and solicited.

So let's do the math, here....

We know the rave reviews would not have kept me out of the 250. So we know that the two "Passes" counted as two of my mandatories. One of those I am absolutely certain that I solicited.

That leaves the third mandatory which had to have been one of the rave reviews. And I am fairly certain I also solicited most of those as well.

But knowing that even one of the mandatories that kept me from advancing was solicited by me, is proof of my claim that the mandatories were not all randomly assigned and that people really could go and get specific scripts from the database and turn in whatever kind of review they wanted to on that script.

Don't you remember that they had to delay the 250 announcement? That was supposedly because not all of the scripts entered had three mandatories done on them?

Think about it.

If PGL was functioning as they were claiming that it was, ALL scripts would have gotten full three review mandatory coverage from the RANDOM assignments.

But that's NOT what they actually did.

As long as it was possible to search the database and voluntarily pull up scripts then it was also possible to turn in reviews on those scripts and, as I KNOW, some of them did count as mandatories. And some scripts did receive an extremely large amount of review just because of soliciting on the boards.

I was fortunate not to have been targeted by the vandals who were deliberately trashing and giving bogus reviews. I got great reviews, with the most helpful one of all being the one valid "Pass" and that one having been solicited by me.

I am not unhappy with my reviews. I am just commenting on the FACT that this "contest" was not what it claimed to be. That's all.

It was extremely foolish to allow the database to be accessible BEFORE the mandatory judging period was over.

It was also somehwat not kosher to allow folks to have their scripts entered in the database before they had done all of their own mandatories I was able to search the database upon uploading my own script and doing the personal review - but I was going to have to review or decline anything I pulled up, a mistake I made with one awful script that I forced myself to wade through so I wouldn't waste a decline.

Do I think PGL violated its own rules and standards by some evil design and intent? I used to think so. Now I'm talking myself into believing it was a matter of incompetence and a poorly designed and executed website that was their undoing.

Or have you all forgotten all the javascript errors or the problems with the personal review form in the beginning?

No, PGL is not what you thought it was. If they want to salvage what it could have been, then they need to do some heavy redesigning and implementation.

I still believe in the concept. I just hope it can survive everything that PGL has done to it so far.

P.S. I am so very grateful to quetee and pickel and all the other reviewers on the Top 30 and other threads for providing valuable input and insight into those scripts that did advance. Because now, nobody can say they did not deserve to be there.

posted 05-09-2001 08:35 PM            

I suggest you go over your reviews and total the points on scaled questions. Obviously, you should eliminate all the reviews you know were solicited. I think you'll find three reviews that gave you somewhat less than perfect numbers. These were probably your three reviews.

I'm not trying to be argumentative here. But unless you knew seven out of the nine reviews you received were solicited, rather than simply two out of the three you suspect, you can't definitely know solicited reviews were used on your script.

I too thought that a solicited review was used in my final talley, as I knew seven out of the eight reviews I received. Or so I thought. It turns out one of the reviewer who told me they had reviewed my script in fact never did. So I had two unknown reviews, and a third done by someone I later met on the boards.

I also suspect the scripts that made the top 250 had near perfect scores on all counts.