GW Board Game

[Messiah]

.

How To Win At Monotony
(Courtesy of Site Admin)

The Outright Winners of Monotony are deemed to be all of those thousands of members who have joined (and will continue to join) Great Writing with the intention of posting absolutely no work whatsoever: Thus proving that their work is of “Best” quality and therefore far too good for GW - thereby undermining and belittling the posted work of active members.

Second Place will be awarded to all of those members who have posted work on GW and then deleted/removed it: Thus proving that their deleted/removed posts are of “Best” quality and therefore too good for GW - thereby undermining and belittling the non-deleted work of their (former) peers.

The Losers (with a Big “L”) will be all those members of GW who actually post work and leave it on display for their peers to “enjoy”: Who—although using the site exactly as it was intended it be used—are making it quite clear for all to see that their efforts are substandard compared to all the “Best” quality work which has been posted (or not) on GW and then deleted/removed.

There has been some very good work done on GW but lots of the good stuff is then removed…

What remains is therefore not the "best" work of the writers on this site.

.

[Keith exD]

I guess I'm not too good at this game or I don't know the rules. I usually remove my posts after a while (a few weeks or months) because they don't get commented on and I get the sneaky feeling they were either no good or nobody could give a monkey's toss about reading them. Sometimes I offer the ones I like for submission (even when Mr. Nobody of GW comments on them) and they get accepted. If they haven't been removed I feel obliged to do so out of respect of those who are actually interested enough to read them.

If I get comments on pieces, I am happy and tend to leave them for a long time, unless they are accepted for submission by someone.

I am not sure how I rate in the loser's stakes when it come to spending a considerable amount of time reading and commenting on somebody's post (with the hope of helping them) and never receiving a reply to my comments, or just 'thanks' or even a 'dummy spitting' tirade (Thankfully, very rare on GW).

I guess I must get used to being a, GW-BIG L

In future, when I remove a piece I will try to remember to leave a note saying withdrawn due to: lack of interest; accepted for publication; re-writing or too fucking good for GW readers.

[Messiah]

...too fucking good for GW readers.

That's the spirit!

I must admit that I struggle with the concept of promoting GW by way off advising new members that that which is on display is "not the 'best' work of the writers on this site".

It's just as well that all of my stuff is rubbish; I'd hate to buck the trend.

[Ben Allen]

Does that mean that the stuff that I haven't posted because I thought it was bad is better than the stuff that I have posted? Or is the stuff that I've posted just bad anyway and if I take it down people will think it was better than it was when it was left up?
What about if I take the stuff I've posted down and put the bad stuff up and then take the bad stuff down that has become better than the stuff I thought was good because I posted it but then removed it, which made it better, but with the stuff I thought was good being left up for a while, will that become not as good as the stuff that went straight up and then down again? Will that make the bad stuff better than the original stuff because it's not there anymore? If I take it all off will it all become good stuff? Then I won't have anything posted but people will think I'm really good because I post it and then remove it.
Also, is it real?
I mean, if all I have to do is post and then remove does my work become automatically better without putting any extra work in and I can just send it off to a publisher as it is?
This would be something of a Godsend.

Talking of which, thank you for pointing this out, Messiah, I'm remarkably excited about the possibilites.
I'm getting the manuscript envelopes ready as I type and plan to post and remove at least another thirty pieces of my work before the end of the week.

Ben

[kanasta]

Doesn't it seem logical that the stuff on here won't be the best work though? In general, I thought people put work on here to get comments, then maybe used those comments to help with rewriting - perhaps they will then post again, but when they get it to the point where they don't want to rewrite any more and therefore don't want any more comments, they won't post it again - so generally the final (and best) work doesn't get seen. I guess different people use the site in different ways.

[Ben Allen]

Doesn't it seem logical that the stuff on here won't be the best work though? In general, I thought people put work on here to get comments, then maybe used those comments to help with rewriting - perhaps they will then post again, but when they get it to the point where they don't want to rewrite any more and therefore don't want any more comments, they won't post it again - so generally the final (and best) work doesn't get seen. I guess different people use the site in different ways.

I took this thread to be fairly tongue in cheek

I usually have my offline copy and the one posted and make changes to the offline copy if the advice that I've been given will improve the piece. If I think that I need further advice I'll edit the online copy in the hope of further critique, although the need for that could be infinite so I have to rein it in a bit!
It maybe depends on why the writer is posting, sometimes I'll post just because I think that other people might find the story/poem entertaining or comical, no other reason, other times I'm just trying to improve my writing and on the odd occasion it might be that I've written something that I hope to get polished enough to submit somewhere.

Ben

[kanasta]

I took this thread to be fairly tongue in cheek

In general, so did I, but this comment didn't seem to be particularly so:

I must admit that I struggle with the concept of promoting GW by way off advising new members that that which is on display is "not the 'best' work of the writers on this site".

[Sue]

Steve likes to try and get a rise out the Admins. If he feels they have made a statement with loopholes in it he'll dive through them just to prove he can

I've been too busy to care this morning. Just having lunch now. (2-30, and no I am not going to the Chinese dentist.)

[Messiah]

If he feels they have made a statement with loopholes in it he'll dive through them...

An admins' loophole? O, that such a thing should exist!


The Financial Tomes

EU Committee Downgrades Great Writing to ''Good Writing''

...if all I have to do is post and then remove, does my work become automatically better without...?

By jove, Ben, I think you've got it!

I guess different people use the site in different ways.

By jove! I think she's got it.


The Grundian

Good Writing Enters Administration
1000s of posts all across the site have been removed today by the Writers' Community Administrator Group, leaving millions of words unemployed.


The Sun

Great Writing Who?
Bundesliga novelist Jurgen Klingon admits that he doesn't know Great Writing.

.

[Keith exD]

It'd take more'n Steve to get a rise out of me. Gimme a big pair of firm boobs any day. What are you insinuating about our Messiah Sue?