Monte Cook's Feedback, only 1 out of 10

[chopswil]

I'd have to say that I expected more feed back from a big game designer like him.
Oh well.

[Trevor Gulliver]

You did see that he posted twice in each thread, right?

[magdalena thiriet]

Yeah, on the first entry I read when I started to go through judges' comments noting that "x out of 10" post from Monte I was "that's it, that's all?" but then noticed that he had written the actual commentary on the previous post...

[Monte Cook]

What more information do you want than what I wrote?

[Montalve]

still reading, but no complains on my part

[Mike Welham]

I think/hope that the issue was seeing the second post (where you just had a score and "recommended"/"not recommended") as the only post, while missing the first post that had your rationale.

[Portella]

S
e
o
n
i

Monte Cook wrote:

What more information do you want than what I wrote?

Spoiler:

Your national security number? credit card details? how doesn it feel to have worked on the most awesome setting of all time (planescape)

what you want chopswil?

[Mothman]

Um … what exactly were you looking for or expecting? I found his comments just as insightful and useful as those of the other judges, and the guest judges in previous rounds.

Actually, perhaps I shouldn’t say useful as such; I tried very hard to read all the entries and make up my mind before going back and reading the judges’ comments. But maybe I did find Monte’s commentary useful after all, ‘cos I think I ended up voting for two of the ones he gave highest marks to…

Either way, it’s really interesting to see what all these industry professionals look for in a submission. I don’t always agree with their assessment of the entries, but it’s cool to read what they have to say.

[Clark Peterson]

Mothman wrote:

Either way, it’s really interesting to see what all these industry professionals look for in a submission. I don’t always agree with their assessment of the entries, but it’s cool to read what they have to say.

That's all we're here for. This is YOUR contest, not ours.

Clark

[Portella]

S
e
o
n
i

Clark Peterson wrote:

Mothman wrote:

Either way, it’s really interesting to see what all these industry professionals look for in a submission. I don’t always agree with their assessment of the entries, but it’s cool to read what they have to say.

That's all we're here for. This is YOUR contest, not ours.

Clark

*sigh*

[roguerouge]

Well, that's sort of rude from the OP. I've only agreed once with Sean K Reynolds, but I don't go all "Worst Judge Ever" on him.

[Portella]

S
e
o
n
i

roguerouge wrote:

Well, that's sort of rude from the OP. I've only agreed once with Sean K Reynolds, but I don't go all "Worst Judge Ever" on him.

Yep

[Sean K Reynolds]

To be fair, chops hasn't posted in this thread since the first post, and it's clear he didn't notice that Monte made two replies to each entry--but he may have noticed since then, and just not commented here.