Able to see my item comments?

[chopswil]

I'd personally like to see what comments there were for the item that I submitted. Any possibility for this?
Tough to improve without seeing/getting feedback.

thanks

[gbonehead]

They've said "no" a number of times, in various ways. In my mind that's the most frustrating part of the whole contest: no feedback == no improvment next year.

[Mike Olson]

gbonehead wrote:

They've said "no" a number of times, in various ways. In my mind that's the most frustrating part of the whole contest: no feedback == no improvment next year.

I was totally accepting of that -- figured it'd be extra work for them -- until I saw that they've already made comments on every item. It would just be a matter of letting us see them, which would be zero extra work.

[allen trussell]

Agreed! I'd like to know how the judges felt about the items that lost, and what those writers could have done to make the cut. I feel that I submitted a good, solid item, but I obviously didn't make the cut. Did I miss something? Was my item just not "enough"? How could I improve so that when I submit something again (another contest, open call, etc.), it would be accepted? I'd like to know so I can grow. :)

[Jeremy Clements]

Mike Olson wrote:

gbonehead wrote:

They've said "no" a number of times, in various ways. In my mind that's the most frustrating part of the whole contest: no feedback == no improvment next year.

I was totally accepting of that -- figured it'd be extra work for them -- until I saw that they've already made comments on every item. It would just be a matter of letting us see them, which would be zero extra work.

I think they only made comments on the upper 100 or so items. THe ones they threw back and forth deciding on...

[Mike Olson]

Jeremy Clements wrote:

I think they only made comments on the upper 100 or so items. THe ones they threw back and forth deciding on...

In that case, I stand by my position. *shrug* Let's see the top 100. My only concern with seeing them all was that maybe some of the ones on the bottom would have some embarrassing comments -- e.g., "Why can't these idiots spell?" -- but the top 100 should be free of that sort of thing.

[R D Ramsey]

Mike Olson wrote:

Jeremy Clements wrote:

I think they only made comments on the upper 100 or so items. THe ones they threw back and forth deciding on...

In that case, I stand by my position. *shrug* Let's see the top 100. My only concern with seeing them all was that maybe some of the ones on the bottom would have some embarrassing comments -- e.g., "Why can't these idiots spell?" -- but the top 100 should be free of that sort of thing.

It's technically possible to just send the comments via email to the submitter, though it would likely involve some scripting work...

[Takasi]

You can learn by watching the winners?

[propeliea]

Mike Olson wrote:

Jeremy Clements wrote:

I think they only made comments on the upper 100 or so items. THe ones they threw back and forth deciding on...

In that case, I stand by my position. *shrug* Let's see the top 100. My only concern with seeing them all was that maybe some of the ones on the bottom would have some embarrassing comments -- e.g., "Why can't these idiots spell?" -- but the top 100 should be free of that sort of thing.

Some of the 32 have those comments ;)

[Midrealm DM]

gbonehead wrote:

They've said "no" a number of times, in various ways. In my mind that's the most frustrating part of the whole contest: no feedback == no improvment next year.

I think the main concern is their comments may offend some-

If a judge commented..
"What were they thinking on this one? Its like they didn't even read the rules?"

So they were promised that their comments would remain unseen to allow them the freedom to not have to 'sugar-coat' their comments and allow the other judges to see exactly what they think in no uncertain terms.

That being said, I too would like to know how my submission fared.

[Mike Olson]

propeliea wrote:

Some of the 32 have those comments ;)

Then again, even more reason: Clearly they're not concerned about bruising a few egos.

[propeliea]

Mike Olson wrote:

propeliea wrote:

Some of the 32 have those comments ;)

Then again, even more reason: Clearly they're not concerned about bruising a few egos.

Agreed. I'm not bothered either way, but there's no harm. Egos are already bruiesed or not bruised.

[allen trussell]

Takasi wrote:

You can learn by watching the winners?

Sure, why not? One could at least learn more of what the judges are looking for, understand what they consider a superstar. Absolutely.

[Karelzarath]

Mike Olson wrote:

propeliea wrote:

Some of the 32 have those comments ;)

Then again, even more reason: Clearly they're not concerned about bruising a few egos.

If you don't have a thick skin, you're not a Superstar. :D

[James Raine]

allen trussell wrote:

Takasi wrote:

You can learn by watching the winners?

Sure, why not? One could at least learn more of what the judges are looking for, understand what they consider a superstar. Absolutely.

Yes, but direct commentary on your own material is worlds more effective than surrogate commenting on an item that may or may not share characteristics with your own.

[AKA_Bait]

Just wanted to chime in and agree. I don't think it would be a big effort just to unlock the threads on which there were comments for viewing. I'm not saying to unlock them for commenting, I'm sure everyone has better things to do than deal with someone arguing about why their entry was not cool enough, but just allowing us to see what was said would

a) placate us.
b) likley improve the crop of items they get free IP over next year.
c) not take very much effort.

Plus I'd be really grateful. :-)

Also, one can learn more by watching both the winners and the losers. Especially if you are one of the losers and can now pinpoint where you fell short.

[WormysQueue]

Takasi wrote:

You can learn by watching the winners?

Takasi has made a good point. Compare your own item with those who made the cut. This should give you some hints why your item probably has been rejected (at least I can guess why mine was ;) ).

This said, I wouldn't mind to see the comments (if any) made about my item. With two kids you get used to harsh comments if you do something stupid.

[James Raine]

WormysQueue wrote:

Takasi wrote:

You can learn by watching the winners?

Takasi has made a good point. Compare your own item with those who made the cut. This should give you some hints why your item probably has been rejected (at least I can guess why mine was ;) ).

This said, I wouldn't mind to see the comments (if any) made about my item. With two kids you get used to harsh comments if you do something stupid.

The problem I'm having is that nothing like mine is presented as a winner.

[Eric Carltock]

I would like to see how I did as well, but realize now that My item was more than likely "too swiss army" for them (Even though it focuses only on writing). However, after reading the "top 32" I was more than unimpressed with the judges final selections, and their reasons for picking them was more or less how they felt that day, or how it struck them at that moment, which leaves a bland taste in my mouth.

Secondly, most of the items had some sort of combat element accociated with them, or tied into weapons somehow, its a shame that pure non combat stuff couldn't make into to the list save for the lamp of perception, which I thought was truley a superstar item. That and the shawl were the only 2 items on that list that I really cared for.

Anyways, now its in the hands of the voters, and not so much the judges, so I will be wittling down the posers, and making sure that the winner is going to be truely a superstar, not some combat monkey wannabee, which is where most of these items fell into. This doesn't mean the top 32 are, its just the way the judges picked, and gives you some idea what you should of sumbitted in the first place. Bleh.

[AKA_Bait]

faxcelestis wrote:

The problem I'm having is that nothing like mine is presented as a winner.

I'm having that same problem. The only reason I can come up with for possible rejection other than 'it's just not cool enough' is a potential pricing issue (they could have thought it was too expensive). If it's the former, which I strongly suspect, I'd like to see what, if any, commentary there was so I can better know my target audience.

[Patrick Walsh]

Post your item to the "Losing Items" thread and see if you can get some feedback that way.

[AKA_Bait]

Patrick Walsh wrote:

Post your item to the "Losing Items" thread and see if you can get some feedback that way.

Can't. It's not my IP anymore. I don't see any company authorization allowing all the other people on that thread to do so either...

[Eric Carltock]

AKA_Bait wrote:

faxcelestis wrote:

The problem I'm having is that nothing like mine is presented as a winner.

I'm having that same problem. The only reason I can come up with for possible rejection other than 'it's just not cool enough' is a potential pricing issue (they could have thought it was too expensive). If it's the former, which I strongly suspect, I'd like to see what, if any, commentary there was so I can better know my target audience.

I really dont think its the price. While some may have had a nickpit about price i don't think it was the determining factor, instead perhaps it should of been "Cooler" (To them) which means to me it should of had either a draw back or some combat element to it. Our target demo seems to be young Dragon Ball Z kiddos. <Rolls eyes>

[Steven Helt]

Well,I have mixed feelings about getting comments on my item:

First, I stand by the item. I am not sure I should post it for opinions, since it isn't my property. If I see a go ahead from someone on staff, I'll start a thread and solicit opinions. But if I know it's good, the comments of the judges may just be upsetting:

"Good item. Unique concept. Good format. Every party will want one. But there are thirty divination items. I say we take the best one and reject the rest."

Not helpful to me as a designer. Or this:

"Good format, but I think it might be that steve guy. He sure seems to think a lot of himself. I hope he never gets published and contracts malaria."

Or even worse:

"Ancient Sensei: We're sorry, but we don't appear to have a submission from you."

This is not to say I don't want to learn from the Powers that judged us. I make sacrifices to their altars all the time. But I think some brutal comments shouldn't be published. I think some comments wouldn't be helpful. And I think you can't really discriminate and only release 20 good dialogues.

Second: These guys worked hard, ridiculous hours to get this thing judged on time. We might second guess them (in limited and respectful fashion - it is their house), we might want them to appriase our item so we can get better next year. But mostly, we should let them get some rest, and just be grateful we even had an opportunity. If you didn't make it, but you think you're really a superstar, you'll get another chance!

[WormysQueue]

FaxCelestis wrote:

The problem I'm having is that nothing like mine is presented as a winner.

The same goes for my item, but that doesn't stop any analysis. Look for some of the items which got the best commentaries - the Beacon of Hope and the Lantern of Selective Perception come to mind. What made those items stand out of the crowd? Then look for the items which were flawed but made the cut nonetheless. Why did the judges decide to ignore said flaws?

My item had a strong connection to Golarion so I can look for other items sharing this connection (or at least seem to). The Maw of Urgathoa, the Goblin Strand of Ears, the Seer's Tea (great item, by the way) or even the Coin Belt of Beguiling, they share this connection, so what made these items better than mine?

I agree it would be great to read the commentaries, but from what I've seen, you would even then need to do some analysis. To quote one of Erik Mona's comments on the Coin Belt of Beguiling:

Erik Mona wrote:

I like this one. An easy jump into the next round.

This is a great compliment, but it doesn't help me to answer the question why this item is so liked. Maybe he said about mine: "Utterly crap." Even then I'd like to see it but it wouldn't help me much to improve.

edit: ah, man, the sensei beat me to it :)

[James Raine]

WormysQueue wrote:

The same goes for my item, but that doesn't stop any analysis. Look for some of the items which got the best commentaries - the Beacon of Hope and the Lantern of Selective Perception come to mind. What made those items stand out of the crowd? Then look for the items which were flawed but made the cut nonetheless. Why did the judges decided to ignore said flaws?

My item had a strong connection to Golarion so I can look for other items sharing this connection (or at least seem to). The Maw of Urgathoa, the Goblin Strand of Ears, the Seer's Tea (great item, by the way) or even the Coin Belt of Beguiling, they share this connection, so what made these items better than mine?

I agree it would be great to read the commentaries, but from what I've seen, you would even then need to make some analysis. To quote one of Erik Mona's comments on the Coin Belt of Beguiling:

This is a great compliment, but it doesn't help me to answer the question why this item is so liked. Maybe he said about mine: "Utterly crap." Even then I'd like to see it but it wouldn't help me much to improve.

Even succinct comments like that are better than nothing. With a comment like "Poor concept," "Bad implementation," or even "I don't like it," it shows the designer what is wrong with their submission. If my item got the comments, "Too long," "Bad mechanical implementation," and "Dumb concept," at least then I'd have a better idea how to standardize my item in the future. From those comments, I'd be able to gather to make my items more concise, make the mechanics clearer, and to perhaps consider a different style of concept for material in the future. Perhaps something I think is awesome is something no one else would care for. Perhaps a mechanic I think needs more clarity is clear enough with less text.

Even the smallest comment can provide a world of aid. Really, that's all I'm looking for.

[CNB]

allen trussell wrote:

Sure, why not? One could at least learn more of what the judges are looking for, understand what they consider a superstar. Absolutely.

Well, so far I've learned the following did not, in and of themselves, prevent you from moving on:

1) Terrible lore
2) Bad writing skills
3) Underpricing
4) Unbalanced items
5) Poor grasp of mechanics

I had assumed if you violated any of the above you would have been auto-rejected; that's apparently not the case. I have no clear idea of what distinguished the items that passed from the items that failed. The only sure way of moving on was "If one of the judges liked it", and it's impossible to have any idea what that means without being able to compare to the items the judges didn't like.

Reviewing the comments on your item would, at least, allow you to get some sense of why your item didn't make it.

[CastleMike]

Erik said you are free to post your item.

[James Raine]

CastleMike wrote:

Erik said you are free to post your item.

That would be feasible if I still had the text for said item. I do not.

[Jim Groves]

AKA_Bait wrote:

Patrick Walsh wrote:

Post your item to the "Losing Items" thread and see if you can get some feedback that way.

Can't. It's not my IP anymore. I don't see any company authorization allowing all the other people on that thread to do so either...

It was formerly granted in the aforementioned thread by Erik Mona.

[Greg Monk]

Well, clearly I'm an idiot.

Or perhaps I mistakenly placed a cursed Helm of Alignment on my head, failed the save, and became Chaotic Stupid.

In any event, I failed, as well, to save a copy of my own submission. I don't supoose there's any way of retrieving it...?

Guess I too, am interested in a posting of the "non-winners" and comments, if only as a sneaky way of retrieving my original post.

[James Raine]

Monkster wrote:

Well, clearly I'm an idiot.

Or perhaps I mistakenly placed a cursed Helm of Alignment on my head, failed the save, and became Chaotic Stupid.

Hey, at least you started Lawful Intelligent.

[Vic Wertz]

Midrealm DM wrote:

[The judges] were promised that their comments would remain unseen to allow them the freedom to not have to 'sugar-coat' their comments and allow the other judges to see exactly what they think in no uncertain terms.

You are correct. The judges specifically went through their comments on the Top 32 and cleared them for publication; they don't have the time to do that for the other 820ish.

However, I believe they are planning to write up some form of postmortem.

[Clark Peterson]

Yes, the comments that you are allowed to see are the comments we didnt cut out.

We each went through and sanitized them--I cut stuff on each and every item. I didnt want to prejudice things too much. And a few of the discussions were tough or referenced other items by comparison that did not advance.

So the comments you are seeing are our edited comments.

Plus, they are only the comments that relate to the decision to move the item into the "keep" pile. Once it was in the keep pile we had a different dicussion thread for sorting between the various keepers. Because that thread isnt item specific, it would be too much work to cut out the non-advancing items.

So most items actually have much more discussion than you are seeing, either because it has been edited or because the discussion happened after the decision to move the item into the keep pile.

As for rejected items, believe me, you dont want to see them. There is no way we can go back and edit them out. And if we did, then the ones we didnt show--those people would all know that our comments were brutal. So you see the problem we have...

[Raymond Rich]

Call me cynical, but I think most folks want to see comments not to actually learn anything, but for the sense of validation that will come from being told they were "just this close" to making the top 38.

The reality is probably far less encouraging.

Looking at the winning entries, I can piece together why I didn't make the cut. I'm disappointed, sure, but have no regrets, even if the wait for the results was gut-wrenching. I look forward to participating in the voting aspect of this contest and in entering future contests.

I think it's very gracious of Erik to allow us to share our failing efforts on the boards for feedback without fear of violating IP. That should be enough. Let's not harrass the judges to the point that they look back on this as more trouble than it was worth, eh?

[Zachary Hensley]

Clark Peterson wrote:

As for rejected items, believe me, you dont want to see them. There is no way we can go back and edit them out. And if we did, then the ones we didnt show--those people would all know that our comments were brutal. So you see the problem we have...

I, for one, would be tremendously amused if I saw the following review of my item:

Clark P: It's crap. Too basic and not very useful.

Wolfgang: Agreed. This item is complete f&%!ing garbage. Hose it.

Erik M: Ye gods, I think this is worst one yet. I'm going to print this one out and wipe my ass with it. Rejected.

[Erik Mona]

I, on the other hand, didn't "sanitize" any of my comments.

That said, I apparently said a lot more on some of the rejected items than the ones that made it, since some of my comments there are a bit thin.

We commented on all 850+ items, btw.

[Clark Peterson]

You dont want to see that stuff. And there are only a couple that have stuff like that. There arent very many.

You have to realize, we had a very high standard as to item concept for this competition.

What many in the sour grapes thread arent realizing is that we all agreed that our standard could not be "no editing required." Not only would that mean no one would win, but it just isnt reality.

[James Raine]

Erik Mona wrote:

I, on the other hand, didn't "sanitize" any of my comments.

That said, I apparently said a lot more on some of the rejected items than the ones that made it, since some of my comments there are a bit thin.

We commented on all 850+ items, btw.

You know what? I apologize. I'm sounding rather whiny and selfish, and I'll cut it out. I was under the impression that we'd be able to see our items when we're done--which was both false and in no way implied or stated by anyone with any sort of authority.

//shrug

The winners deserve their rewards, and I understand the decisions made wholeheartedly.

[Clark Peterson]

Mike Olson wrote:

gbonehead wrote:

They've said "no" a number of times, in various ways. In my mind that's the most frustrating part of the whole contest: no feedback == no improvment next year.

I was totally accepting of that -- figured it'd be extra work for them -- until I saw that they've already made comments on every item. It would just be a matter of letting us see them, which would be zero extra work.

No, we would have to sanitize some of them, and to do that we would have to re-read ALL of them. That is a ton of extra work.

[cappadocius]

Clark Peterson wrote:

What many in the sour grapes thread arent realizing is that we all agreed that our standard could not be "no editing required." Not only would that mean no one would win, but it just isnt reality.

Well, there's editing, and then there's "complete rewrite". I suspect what we sour grapers aren't actually realizing is that even the worst of the 32, the ones we feel are simply unusable as presented, are probably 100, 1000 times better than a lot of the rejects. And since we (by we, I mean you judges) don't want to hold someone up and say, "God in Heaven, man, do you even speak English", we won't get those comparisons.

But I still say I should've been Top 38. ;)

[allen trussell]

CNB wrote:

allen trussell wrote:

Sure, why not? One could at least learn more of what the judges are looking for, understand what they consider a superstar. Absolutely.

Well, so far I've learned the following did not, in and of themselves, prevent you from moving on:

1) Terrible lore
2) Bad writing skills
3) Underpricing
4) Unbalanced items
5) Poor grasp of mechanics

I had assumed if you violated any of the above you would have been auto-rejected; that's apparently not the case. I have no clear idea of what distinguished the items that passed from the items that failed. The only sure way of moving on was "If one of the judges liked it", and it's impossible to have any idea what that means without being able to compare to the items the judges didn't like.

Reviewing the comments on your item would, at least, allow you to get some sense of why your item didn't make it.

From the judges' comments I'd say they picked out the 32 based on originality and creativity. With very few exceptions, all of the 32 items were exceptionally unique. True, I do think some of them weren't quite by the rules, but they were original.

I would still like to see the judges' comments on my item, though...

[Mark Brehob]

Add me to the "me too" pile on wanting to see comments.

Although apparently I was one of 100 people who did divination magic with coins...

Mark

[Wolfgang Baur]

FWIW, I did not edit any of my comments, though I considered it for the Malleus Mallificarum.

As a judge, I wasn't looking for perfect, because that would have meant no winners. I was looking for a combination of originality, grasp of design, language skills, and potential to do good work in later rounds.

As with any slush pile, 50% of the entries can be discarded out of hand. Another 30% or so are good but fail to inspire anyone to champion them. 10% are good but have some flaw that nixes it. The remaining 10% are the hard choices (71 items, in our case).

CNB has never read a slush pile; if we had auto-rejected for his 5 reasons, there would have been essentially no entries left, and those surviving would have been BORING. It's not about choosing perfect items; it's about choosing items that inspire a reaction. I think we looked at a fair number of goofy items (because those got at least a look for novelty) and a fair number of well-balanced-but-dull items, and a fair number of just plain bad items.

I'm sort of thinking that CNB should run his own contest. We had a lot of good entries, and a lot of middling, and a lot of bad. I'm content that the top 32 were all good.

[Wolfgang Baur]

Mark Brehob wrote:

Although apparently I was one of 100 people who did divination magic with coins...

It was a very popular theme.

[Wicht]

Wolfgang Baur wrote:

Mark Brehob wrote:

Although apparently I was one of 100 people who did divination magic with coins...

It was a very popular theme.

What surprised me, and one reason i entered one - I couldn't find a magical divination coin anywhere i looked online.

[Skaven13]

Fatespinner wrote:

Clark Peterson wrote:

As for rejected items, believe me, you dont want to see them. There is no way we can go back and edit them out. And if we did, then the ones we didnt show--those people would all know that our comments were brutal. So you see the problem we have...

I, for one, would be tremendously amused if I saw the following review of my item:

Clark P: It's crap. Too basic and not very useful.

Wolfgang: Agreed. This item is complete f@&&ing garbage. Hose it.

Erik M: Ye gods, I think this is worst one yet. I'm going to print this one out and wipe my ass with it. Rejected.

Kinda like American Idol, but everyone is Simon. ;)

[David Posener]

Wolfgang Baur wrote:

...

As with any slush pile, 50% of the entries can be discarded out of hand.

...

Step 1: Split the slush pile into two

Step 2: Place one of the two piles into a recycle bin
Step 3: Announce "If you're unlucky, you're not RPG Superstar material!"

;)

Unfortunately, I once knew a HR director who used this approach on a pile of resumes ("I don't hire unlucky people").

[Kari Houle]

I agree. Even if the comments are harsh or thin, I would rather have something. Just to get a little understanding of the views of the item submitted. Just my two cents. If it's at all possible, I'd love to see the comments.

[James Hunnicutt]

Raymond Rich wrote:

Looking at the winning entries, I can piece together why I didn't make the cut.

QFT! I've learned a lot reviewing the judges' commentaries on the 32 superstars.