Lois & Clark Forums Forums General Discussion Fun with Polls Reading and Nominating :)

So we were chatting on IRC, where for the last week or so the channel topic's been So, have you sent in your nominations yet? Get on with it! or something of that ilk. And some people said they wouldn't be nominating because they didn't feel they'd read enough stories, that it wouldn't be fair to the stories they hadn't read if they nominated on the basis of the few they'd read. And others said that they should nominate anyway if they'd read stories they liked, regardless of the others.

So what do people think? Nominate regardless, or stay out of it unless you've read almost everything?

Comments on a postcard, please...


Wendy

Well, I'm one of those people who doesn't like to nominate if I haven't read at least the majority of the eligible stories. The subset of stories I do read is relatively random, but it may be skewed toward certain authors, certain genres, whether or not I have time to read it when the story first comes out, etc. So it doesn't seem fair to nominate those stories over other stories that might be equally good but for whatever reason I haven't read yet.

On the other hand, I don't wish to presume to tell other people how to nominate <g>. So I voted Other on the second question.

Kaylle

Define read. I check out the beginning of most stories, either the first installment posted on the mbs or the first few pages of those posted on the mbs. At that point i pretty much know whether I want to continue with the story or not. If I do I download it to be read later. This year RL has kept me away from reading as much and so right now I'm frantically trying to catch up in time to nominate. I've always felt that it's really important to give all the stories a look at to be fair when it comes to nominating. Hope I can manage to do that this year.

c

Well, in the past, I've always diligently read everything on the list - after having knocked out those stories I know that I'm not going to be nominating.

This year, I simply haven't had time to catch up with 99% of what's eligible and with time running out it looks unlikely that I'll catch up.

So, I've been pondering this very question all week. I am going to read as much as I can get to over the next couple of days, but I've pretty much decided that in the end it's better if I at least nominate what little I've read and feel are deserving of recognition, than not nominate at all.

It's not perfect and I'm less than happy with it, since it undoubtedly means that I'll miss out on nominating a good story because I never read it in time, but this year it's simply the best I can do.

LabRat (who deeply regrets not having kept up with her 'mark it down on a list as you read it, there and then' list this year...)

I myself will nominate stories of several different authors , which I won't name cause I don't want to hurt other peoples feelings. I love their work. I don't have to read it to know it's good, their stories speak for themself :0)

Labrat wrote:
Wondering what criteria you used for knocking out those stories you knew you wouldn't be nominating before you started your reading?

Anita wrote:
Think I'm reading this wrong. That doesn't mean that you nominate stories you haven't actually read, does it ?

c.

This is the first year for quite a few that I've actually nominated. The last couple of years, I've waited for the shortlists to come out and then have read everything in the categories in which I was voting.

The reason I haven't nominated in so long is that I had not read enough stories to feel able to do so. This year, however, I have read a lot. (I think I've read about 3/4 of the eligible stories, albeit with a bias towards the shorter ones.)

I do feel bad, though, that I haven't read everything. Okay, so there are some stories that I peaked at and which didn't catch my attention. I don't feel so bad that I've discounted them; at least I got to take a look at them first. Far more worrying, though, are the other stories out there that are probably excellent, but that I've not managed to read. (And I hereby apologise to those people whose stories have got missed in my reading.)

Still, I do think that it was worth nominating those stories that particularly impressed me of those that I have read.

As for whether I would encourage people to nominate stories when they, like me, have not read everything... I'd give that a resounding 'yes'. I hope that, if enough people nominate then they will compensate for each other's 'gaps'. In other words, the more nominations the better, even if they are not 'complete'. (Okay, if we're going to talk sampling strategies, there may be bias in... Oh, shut up, Chris! That's just getting way too involved! )

Speaking from experience, here: I did want to read everything this year. I even set myself targets to get everything read before deadline. The trouble with that is that what should be a pleasure became more of a chore... kind of like homework. In the end, I just said, enough is enough. Let's nominate from what I have read. Having sent those nominations in, I felt as though a weight had been lifted off my shoulders!

Ideally, I would want to read everything. But that ideal has to be balanced against the fact that reading and writing fanfic is a hobby. If the hobby stops being fun, for whatever reason, then what is the point?

Chris

Before I started my Kerth reading from the eligibles list, Carol. There are other areas of reading that occur prior to the list being released, of course.

IOW, I knock out those stories I've read or partially read on the mbs or elsewhere throughout the year, which I already know I'm not going to nominate.

Thus, when the eligibles list is released, I already have a sum of stories that I can delete out of hand, having already made my decision on them.

That leaves what I haven't been able to read throughout the year, which I then read and judge.

Usually. But, as I say, time constraints may make this the first year I don't get to read everything eligible.

Yes, and that reminds me I do want to pick up on the other set of questions in the poll. It's my belief that so long as the rules of the awards, as set out by K-Comm, are adhered to, everyone has the absolute right to nominate to their own plan, exactly as suits them.

Whether that be reading everything out there, only nominating a few stories they think deserve consideration, nominating their own stories...whatever. I don't think it's up to anyone else to say one way is wrong and another right. Each to their own. And I agree with Chris - do it in whatever way makes the process fun for you.

Is nominating your own stories against the rules, come to think of it? I know voting for your own stories isn't, but just thought to wonder if that holds true for nominating also. No idea.


LabRat

How can you not read a story to know it's good? This is exactly the attitude that I've always thought existed in folcdom. Some authors are "known" to write good stories. Others aren't. But what if these other authors suddenly start writing good stories. What if the "good" authors have sub par stories? So, really, if an author who wrote their first really good story this year doesn't get nominated (be it new authors or older authors who have never been nominated), it might be because people nominate their old favorites withotu even reading the story? That troubles me . . . but it might be another reason why I was never nominated before last year.

I, personally, keep a running list of stories throughout the year that I particularly read and enjoyed. I do read pretty much every single short story, but I am a little remiss in reading the longer ones. However, with the really long ones, I can usually decide if I like it after 5-10 minutes of reading, and if I don't like it, I stop.

I think people should nominate stories they liked even if they haven't read everything. If a story is good enough to stand out to you, then by all means nominate it. However, don't just nominate it because of the author's reputation. That isn't fair to the other authors.

- Laura

For the record, you are allowed to nominate your own stories, if you choose to.

I haven't nominated yet this year... what with one thing and another, I haven't read as much this year as I normally would. I'll probably still send in noms from the pool of stories I have read, but I haven't committed myself yet.

There are authors out there that I *expect* will write good stories, but past performance is no guarantee of future quality And as Lois said, you're only as good as your last story.

PJ

thanks for the clarification, Labrat

c

I'm glad to see this is getting some discussion, and also pleased to see that so many people don't see a problem with nominating even if you've only read a few stories. Of course, the decision is an individual one, but everyone's busy and reading fanfic isn't exactly an obligation.

And anyway, as Laura and Pam quite rightly pointed out, an author - let's call her Lana Luthor - may have swept the boards in previous years. May have written stories considered to be at the top of everyone's favourites list. May be considered better than many published authors. (And I can think of at least a couple of dozen fanfic writers this could apply to). But maybe her latest story really is an absolute stinker. That does happen. My favourite published authors produce stinkers sometimes; I hate it when they do, but nobody's perfect and nobody's consistently good. Would you buy a carton of eggs without looking inside first to check that none is broken? I wouldn't.

Interesting discussion - please keep it coming!


Wendy

I'm very guilty of not having read a lot of stories this past year, but of the ones I have read, some I plan to nominate and others I do not. I guess what I'm saying is that I see nothing wrong with nominating from the pool of stories you have read. I figure if I liked a story enough to nominate it, I'd nominate it whether I had read 3 stories or 30 stories or 300 stories. It's not as if I have only so many noms (well, okay, we are limited to 8, but that's pretty generous!) so I have to pick and choose carefully or rank things. If a story touched me or was especially good IMO, it deserves my nom and shouldn't be denied it simply because RL kept me too busy to read everything out there. Does that make sense?

However, I do beleive it is imperative that you read all the stories on the short list in a category before voting. In a way, I really look forward to the releasing of the nominations because I get to dive into what people have listed as their own favorites, so I know I'm in for some great reading.

Lynn

Ah, interesting indeed...

I agree wholeheartedly with Wendy, here:

I certainly wouldn't want to think that I'd won (hah! right!) because people nominate on the basis of reputation.

What I can't for the life of my work out is why this is so much worse that avoiding fic that is written by someone whose work you have not enjoyed in the past. Are the two things not the two sides of the same coin: I've liked his / her work in the past therefore, although I haven't read, I'll nominate versus I've not liked his / her work in the past therefore I'll not read and not nominate?

The fact remains, I have a gut reaction that says the first is worse than the second. I have, however, tried to read something by everyone this year; I may not have succeeded, but... Anyway, I've missed out stories, but hopefully I've not missed out on too many authors.

And one of these days, I might actually get around to sending some of that mountain of feedback that is backlogged on my computer... But that's another issue entirely.

Chris

Speaking only for myself, I can say that there are writers who I've given a chance in the past, and usually because of a fundamental problem with their writing (poor grammar/no punctuation/hard to follow because of confusing sentence structure) I will skip a new story written by that writer. I guess it's a flaw but I assume that such a problem is not likely to be fixed and any stories by such a writer will contain more of the same.

Or if I've read a writer's stories and they tend toward a theme that holds no interest for me (the antics of Krypto the superdog), I might tend to skip that writer's latest assuming it is another in that area. Nothing personal towards the writer, of course. Simply a matter of taste (and Wendy knows how I feel about Judith McNaught, yet we happily agree to disagree *vbg*).

Since I only have so much time to read, I admit to going toward a known entity. It's that way in RL as well - when faced with a bookshelf full of books at the bookstore, I naturally gravitate towards writers who I've enjoyed in the past and move away from writers whose books I've found unsatisfactory.

Not that writers don't change and aren't worth giving a second chance. Most certainly, they can and should be. It's just when limited by constraints of time and other commitments, I can excuse people for passing up things I've written if they've been unhappy with what I've done in the past.

It's like if you hate potatoes and you only have so much room on your plate, you might choose to forgo the au grautin potato casserole that you've admittedly never tried and might actually like because you do love cheese. But you only have so much room and you've already eaten a lot of chocolate.

What's cool is that during Kerths, a writer I might have skipped is now someone I will probably read if their stories show up on the short list. By the recommendation of enough people to earn that story a nom, I now have a good reason to take a second look and might be pleasantly surprised. Certainly after that I'd put that writer on the top of my must-read list.

Lynn

Just a question.. if you nominate a story even though you haven't read it, how do you know what category to put it in? I mean.. sure, some authors tend to write the same types of stories -- waffy, angst, comedy. But not always. I mean.. what happened if you voted Yvonne's Damaged in Best Comedy?

I'm still trying to decide if I have time to go through my nominations before Sunday. *sigh*

If it's on the archive, the short blurb plus the size of the story are usually good enough to figure out whether a story will be an angsty drama or a short comedy.

I would never nominate a story I hadn't read no matter how much I love the author. Even if a story isn't a clunker, any author is capable of putting out a so-so story that I would perhaps read once or twice and then never again. Or perhaps an author is very good at a particular type of story and isn't quite as good at others, e.g. good at angsty but not so good at comedy.

Another possibility is that an author may end a story in a controversial manner in an otherwise excellent story. I'll apologize ahead of time to Lynn for singling one of her stories out, but her excellent story, The Butterfly Legacy, comes to mind. While I loved the whole story and thought it was quite appropriate for one of the major characters to die, others thought that development ruined the story as the FDK threads spawned quite a discussion.

In any case, by not reading a story, you're basically nominating blind.

P.S. I had an underhanded reason for bringing up BL. I just had to nag for the Lost Chapters.

As well, there was also some discusssion on the mbs about the characterization of Clark Kent in that story so it's not just the ending that can influence readers. I also recall mbs discussion of whether Lois Lane was depicted 'in character' or not in a couple of fics this year.

Am wondering if both Roger's and my comments are somewhat off-topic in this thread, given the topic of Wendy's poll

c

My starting point is that I want to support the Kerths - they're a great way to reward the writers who give us so much wonderful free entertainment throughout the year, and they're good fun. I figure that the best way to support the Kerths is to take part, and that, in turn, means having a go at the quizzes, nominating stories, voting for stories, and attending the ceremony. Now, I know I can't do any of those things perfectly, but I'd rather do them imperfectly than not at all - because I want to support the Kerths.

So I do some of the quizzes and not others. I nominate stories even though I haven't read every single story in the fandom (but I'd never, ever nominate a story I hadn't read). I vote, but I only vote in categories where I've read every nominated story. And finally, I come to the ceremony (when I can) and have a great time, because I've taken part in the process leading up the ceremony and, as a result, feel really involved and excited.

Yvonne

I had a thought about this yesterday... if you don't nominate because you haven't read everything, isn't that, in a way, unfair to the stories you *have* read? If I only read one Elseworlds this year, I can still tell if (IMO) it's a really good story (good grammar, dialog, set-up, etc). And if I think it's Kerth-worthy, why shouldn't I nominate it?

Voting is somewhat different, because that's a comparative thing -- is this story better than that one, or not? -- but nominating isn't. It's just a question of what stories I think are good enough to win awards.

I'll also point out that, by the nature of the process, there's some idiot-proofing. I can nominate a crappy story, or put one in the wrong category (ex. Faux Pas in Best Short Story), if I want to, but I'll probably be the only one doing so. A couple of years ago, there was a short story that I thought was perfect enough to win Best Overall -- so I nominated it there. But I think I was the only one who did and it didn't make the ballot there. Anyway, point is, the more people we have nominating, the better results we're going to get. So please everybody, send in some nominations! You've only got til midnight (EST) tomorrow!

PJ

/me, who had begun to relax, now runs around in panicked little circles and goes hunting for her pin...


LabRat

I'm sorry, Carol, but I don't recall that particular discussion. I do recall, however, the discussion Roger has mentioned.

But I think Carol has made an excellent point about judging a story without having read it. I know for a fact that she did not read BL, however she has clearly formed an opinion about it based on what she interpreted from the MB comments. That could be one of the worst situations for a story, IMO. Non-readers who do frequent the feedback sections and formulate opinions based on information given out of context of the big picture, the story as a whole. Too, it seems like a good bit of hearsay to comment on a story - or rather, comment on the comments of a story - when you haven't read it yourself. It would be like me telling everyone that a story is really horrible based on the negative feedback of a few people without having read the story myself to know if I even agree with that negative feedback.

And this works the same in reverse - which might lead to a reader believing a story they hadn't read to be wonderful simply because the feedback was wonderful. I would never recommend a story I had not read except to say that I had enjoyed the writer's past efforts.

If you've read a story and have legitimate complaints or glowing applause, you have every right to air those - to stop reading or to nominate the story for as many awards as it can qualify for. If you've not read the story, it seems prudent to remain silent in either direction.

It is completely impossible to formulate an honest opinion about something if you have not read it yourself. Therefore the prospect of nomming a story you've never read, even if it is by a writer who you generally enjoy and respect, is unfair to everyone.

Lynn

Yes, I think you just put into words my feelings on this one, Pam. And so succinctly too! <g>

I kind of feel if I think a story is well written and deserving of an award, it would be a shame not to register my appreciation of it. Regardless of what else I read or don't read.

And the point about the difference between nominating and voting is well made. I agree. I think that does make a difference. At least to the way I approach the Kerths.


LabRat

I think Lynn's right, Carol - I don't remember any discussion of Clark's characterisation in BL either. At least, not on these boards. Though I could be wrong; it was almost a year ago. I do, however, vaguely remember there being a discussion elsewhere, mainly among people who hadn't read the story and seemed to be making assumptions about it from things they'd 'heard'. Dangerous, that.

But you're right that this isn't the subject of the thread. Glad to see so many people wanting to nominate all the great stories out there this year!


Wendy

I'll read as many as I can. I promise I won't nominate any stories. I'll just vote when the time comes.Unless you all prefer me not to vote at all.

I'm sorry for all the pain I caused everyone.

I’ve usually read at least 95% of the eligible stories each year. And I have either read the beginning or skimmed the other 5%. So nominating isn’t a problem! I keep a list of stories I like, and find the quizzes really helpful for refreshing my memory.

I believe it shouldn’t matter how many stories you have read. If you think a story is worthy of nomination go for it. The more nominations there are, the more balanced the results should be.

I agree voting is an entirely different matter. To vote in a category you need to have read all the nominations in that particular category. It’s comparing the stories to each other.

I would never nominate a story I haven’t read. Who the author is or what other readers think is not a fair basis for forming an opinion. I would never give feedback or enter into a debate about a story I haven’t read.

Tricia

Felt I had to reply to both Lynn's and Wendy's posts. My apologies to everyone for hijacking the poll thread somewhat here - but I have to leave town this morning and, although I'd rather deal with this privately, there simply is not the time.

So:
Here's what I wrote a few posts back in this thread in response to Roger's post: << was also some discussion on the mbs about the characterization of Clark Kent in that story>>

To which Lynn replied,
<<I'm sorry, Carol, but I don't recall that particular discussion.>>
and also:
<<I know for a fact that she did not read BL, however she has clearly formed an opinion about it based on what she interpreted from the MB comments.>>
and also: <<it seems like a good bit of hearsay to comment on a story - or rather, comment on the comments of a story>>

and Wendy added:
<< think Lynn's right, Carol - I don't remember any discussion of Clark's characterisation in BL either. At least, not on these boards. Though I could be wrong; it was almost a year ago. I do, however, vaguely remember there being a discussion elsewhere, mainly among people who hadn't read the story and seemed to be making assumptions about it from things they'd 'heard'. Dangerous, that.>>

Anyway, having been censured here I did want to speak in my defense:

<< I know for a fact that she did not read BL>>
I sent Lynn two private e-mails about BL, one after the first installment I think, stating how much I admired her writing skill (which I do!!) and then one much later, in March of last year, explaining that while I very much liked many things about the story, I had difficulty with a couple of aspects and so wouldn't continue reading it at that point. Posted in the mbs feedback folder too about that time. So, as far as Lynn was aware I had read over half the story which is not quite the same as not having read it. In fact, I did read the rest as it was being posted on the mbs - curiosity and hope, I thinkJ, but Lynn, of course, had no way of knowing that I did so.

Sad to know that both Lynn and Wendy think I'd succumb so easily (and unethically) to hearsay, and that I let others shape my opinions. Must become more outspoken in the future - I'm not weak-minded, really.J

Now about the existence of a discussion on characterization in the feedback folders while the story was being posted: I did some checking.

The mbs feedback folders (most of the comments are in the nfic folders) cover a range of topics - writing style, plot, and character development as you find in the feedback comments for most longer stories. Quite a bit of Lois bashing, too, in order to justify Clark's behaviour.

Below are some excerpts that speak to Clark Kent's characterization from those feedback folders - I've included only a few because I don't want to abuse bandwidth more than I'm already doing. A couple of caveats - I've only taken excerpts up to part 13, and also I've omitted the names of the posters because I haven't got their permission to use their quotes. But I've included a range of quotes because I did want to show that there had, in fact, been a discussion, that is a range of opinions posted at the time and from different commenters.

I should add that these quotes probably contain a spoiler or two.

<<<<Clark's enchantment with the village also seems a bit off to me. He's traveled worldwide and he's surely been in similar spots before.>>

<< I was glad to see that he's finally realized that it's selfish of him to stick to just one small village when he could do so much more.>>

<<"Sam" hasn't exactly been straight with Gillian. She doesn't know "Clark Kent".>>

<<I am a sucker for anything 'it's hard to be Super,' so love this insight into how this place has made him normal, what he's always wanted, and what he needs in wake of Lois' crushing 'the ordinary man.'>>

<<It seems that Clark is exhibiting rebound tendencies.>>

<<Even though on the surface Clark seems content to be with the villagers, I can almost sense a tension inside him pushing him to get back to his life.>>

<<I have to admit, that Clark/Sam makes me want to shake him for his own stubbornness,>>

<< like your characterizations a lot, and I really like Gillian.>>

<<But the fact that he doesn't seem to care about anyone else anymore. Right now he is just being a coward, running away and hiding from his problems.

He wasn't the only one to suffer loss. And as someone said before, Luthor might still be out there hurting people, Jack is in prision, Jimmy who knows. The real Clark would be more concern[ed] about his friends, and this Clark isn't.>>

<<Personally, I think what's happening in this story is perfectly within character and a very credible version of what could have happened at this point in Clark's life. His habit, until arriving in Metropolis about a year ago, was to roam the world and move on whenever things became a little tricky for him.>>

So the forgotten discussion of characterization on these mbs, then.

Respectfully

CC Malo

Yes, Carol, it is true that over the course of the 20-plus part story people did on occasion express agreement and disagreement with some of the actions and feelings expressed by various characters. I guess I just never put them all together to get that there was some "discussion" on Clark's characterization, which IMO implies that characterization might have been a major problem in the story. If there is/had been a major problem in this area, I certainly would have wanted to fix it as I feel spot-on characterization is critical to good fanfic.

Since you have read the story (information that is new to me since at last e-mail you had chosen to forgo it), you certainly have every right to comment on anything you see as problematic. I would prefer, however, that you do so either via private e-mail or in the feedback folder where it can be placed in the appropriate context.

I apologize to everyone for letting this topic get so far off center.

Lynn

Excellent point!

1) Other 2) Other.

I'm voting right now and, in order to make sure I'll be giving fair chances to every story, I'm voting only on the categories where I had read the majority (if not all) of the eligible stories (Super Short, Short, Comedy) plus I put in a couple I liked in Mid-Length, Holiday/Special Occasion and Relationship.

There were stories I liked in other categories, too, but I don't feel I've read a good percentage of them in order to vote.

I had this thought just a minute ago.
My lame attempt to answer is, "because if I'd read the other stories I might have liked them more"...
But you're giving me food for thought now, Pam, and that's not good, because I have Physics homework to do!! I'll have to consider it... next year.
In the meantime, I'll quote Yvonne, and I'll enjoy the Kerths the best I can. They're, after all, only once a year!!

See ya,
AnnaBtG.

I have to agree with several of you in saying that I think it's not right to nominate a story you haven't read. I also think that you should nominate really good stories you have read, even if you haven't read everything. Personally, I think people should try to read at least half the stories in a particular area, or skim the first few paragraphs to see if the writing seems to be intriguing enough to continue, if they have time limitations. But then, I'm a speedreader--noticed you said you read fast too, Wendy (wonder how fast we both go? lol)--and so when I discovered several days into it that nominations were open, I didn't think anything of my proclamation to read all 200 fics by the next week. Hehe, I was in for it! The reading took awhile, and I had to sit and summarize and rate each one so I knew exactly how I felt it should stand.
Now, I was able to shorten my reading process by throwing out the worst. There were a few (thankfully I don't even remember which) that I knew immediately would never be nominated; their writing was simply not good enough. But on my rating scale, they were all 1s, and I even summarized the 2s onward (mostly because I wanted to read 'em anyways). If I had had less time, I would have probably thrown out all the 2s and 2-3s and only rated and summarized the really good fics, though that would have been harder to do. For me, the higher the rating, the more difficult to distinguish at a glance. I rated some stories 1s for poor writing--overly simplistic, etc. (the type a child would write) Distinguishing the 1s was an easy process--the lack of quality showed up within a few paragraphs, and I quickly turned from the fic to more important reading. The 2s were that because though they had decent writing, it was nothing special; the plotlines weren't the greatest. In other words, they were decent reading but not award-worthy. They were harder to distinguish from the 3s than the 1s were from the 2s, because the main difference between them and the 3s were the plotlines, a little passage here and there that was touching, etc., though the writing quality factored in some. I would have had to skim the whole thing (or do a first/middle/last skim), or else read the first dozen paragraphs intensely, to be able to decide quickly on those, and that's not easy. 3s and 4s were even harder--the 4s were the ones that left me breathless when I finished--in other words, I had to read the whole thing anyways. And I nominated quite a few 3-4s, stories with really good writing and plotlines, that didn't call to me emotionally the way the 4s did (but that didn't make them less well-written, I thought). So anyways, though it is possible to skim the beginning and know which ones to read or not, those who toss out more than I did must have more clear-cut guidelines, lol. But then, maybe I just question myself a lot. (The idea of keeping track of a list of stories you WON'T nominate is an interesting idea--wouldn't it be more helpful to keep track of the ones you'd consider nominating? To each his or her own, I guess, lol.)
Also, I think that if someone doesn't have much time, maybe focusing on a certain size category would be better--lol, like all the super-shorts and shorts. Or maybe ONLY long ones, and trying to get through 'em all (there were a good 20-some, I think, don't have my file open right now to check). But then it doesn't take care of categories like Best Original/Supporting Character and Best Elseworlds/AU (though it would help with the Comedy, Drama, WAFFy, and short vs. long episode adaptation or revelation fics). I don't know, lol, I'm glad I had the time for all of it!
(Uh-oh, this is definitely not postcard size . . . *looks worried* I have to admit it--I ramble--you should hear me in person!)

Wow !


c

Uh... just a cent here.

I have gone through a few discussions about why writers with a 'reputation' have better chances of getting nominations, kerths or even more feedback than new/other authors.

Indirectly, if people don't read new/other author's stories with the same enthusiasm, this will result in some kind of protection eventhough we think this shouldn't or don't exist.

Well, the truth is it does exist, in my point of view. And what I have recently realized is that the priviledged authors do not have anything to do with that except for the fact that they are really talented and deserve what they get.

I can talk for myself here when I recently told my friends from mIRC I was a little bit sad I wasn't nominated for new author or that none of my MLTVs were nominated at all. But things happen and eventhough being - let me check Wendy's words - the most prolific one, sometimes it doesnt mean the quality of the work is worthy a prize.

What I learned from this? What I told my mIRC friends: Sometimes you win and sometimes you lose. This year I lost nominations, but what I won was better than these - The friends I made here on the boards.

Thus, to finish, I must say I agree with Yvonne when she says she prefers to do it imperfectly than not to do it at all.

So congrats for the talented ones among us who have entertained FoLCs along the year. You are all winners to be there already.

Good luck to all. Especially for my new authors friends. May you all stick to the boards, feeling encouraged to do the wonderful job you already do.

MDL. (aka Erica Dias )

A complete ditto!

As great as a Kerth nom can be, there are so many other benefits to reap than just an icon next to your story title.

Unfortunately for myself, I haven't been able to cement many regular friendships here with my schedule being as it is, but I just love being here because there are so many great people. I personally am happy with the stories I've written, and I love reading everything that everyone else has written, too, Kerth or no Kerth.

Congrats and good luck to everyone! I'm hoping I can pop in for at least a piece of the ceremony.

Jen