Overall submission quality: Is it just me...?

[zylphryx]

Eric asked and I just figured what the heck ... ;)

[James Raine]

It's too...
( •_•)
( •_•)>⌐■-■
(⌐■_■)
kitschy.

(ι´Д｀)ﾉ YEEEEEEEEEAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAH

[Vic Wertz]

I removed a couple of posts from yesterday that were way too specific about particular items.

[Tels]

.
.
.
.
.

James Raine wrote:

It's too...

( •_•)
( •_•)>⌐■-■
(⌐■_■)
kitschy.

(ι´Д｀)ﾉ YEEEEEEEEEAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAH

Every time I see this, I giggle. I can't even be manly and say I chuckled, because no, I giggle when I see this.

[Khaladon]

Well, not sure how many votes gets one the 'Star Voter' heading, but I'm sure it's in the hundreds. And even with all of that, I still didn't see my item even once, although I did see several items repeated many, many, many, many times. Really, some of them came up a lot. As in, much more than quite often.

Overall though, while the quantity of Suck was depressingly high, I did come across a heartening amount of good to very good items, and a few spectacular ones. This was my first time competing in the competition and I have very much enjoyed the process so far. Congrats to all who took the time to compete.

(And Fie on all those who wasted our time with such terrible and obviously-didn't-read-or-pay-any-attention-to-the-rules items. Seriously, shame on you.)

PS I'm still curious on one many items were submitted in total. Anyone know? (or is telling?)

[cwslyclgh]

"Star voter" is between 100 and 500 votes

[jensketch]

The quality of suck was depressingly high indeed. I honestly was surprised. Is it really that hard to stick to a template -- that they give you? I mean... I guess it is.

On the other hand, I am absolutely *rooting* for some favorites and I am looking forward to seeing if my eye and the judges' coincide.

[ciretose]

So when can we start discussing items, since the choices have already been made.

It would give us something to do for the next 5 hours and 45 some odd minutes...

[Jacob W. Michaels]

Honestly, I'd probably wait until tomorrow or even Thursday, as hard as that's going to be. Clark usually waited 24-48 hours before opening his critique thread so the Top 32 could get their due.

[Anthony Adam]

Jacob W. Michaels wrote:

Honestly, I'd probably wait until tomorrow or even Thursday, as hard as that's going to be. Clark usually waited 24-48 hours before opening his critique thread so the Top 32 could get their due.

That's also true of the "What would you have submitted" threads. It is polite and kind to every entrant in the finals to wait until their round is done, including the reveal of the results before opening such threads. That way you don't detract from where the focus should rightly be - on the contenders entries.

For example, I wouldn't want to see any archetypes until the results of the archetype round has been revealed. Same for monsters and so on.

I know it's hard to wait, but you are better off in the long run as those of us who come back to review your work will be able to give it more attention once that round is done and dusted.

[Drejk]

Four more hours? Not counting the time needed for servers to die and get up after being overabused by people checking? *sigh*

[GeneticDrift]

Tels wrote:

.

.
.
.
.

James Raine wrote:

It's too...

( •_•)
( •_•)>⌐■-■
(⌐■_■)
kitschy.

(ι´Д｀)ﾉ YEEEEEEEEEAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAH

Every time I see this, I giggle. I can't even be manly and say I chuckled, because no, I giggle when I see this.

Omg I missed the reference when I first saw this (thought a formatting error messed it up), have one cake and internets good sir or madam.