PDA

View Full Version : What kind of PGL BS is this?

GothamWriter
03-26-2004, 02:43 PM
None of the reviews for my script were used for scoring?

I paid my entry fee.

I dilignetly reviewed five scripts.

And my script never had a chance?
CeeDub1
03-26-2004, 02:45 PM
Maybe nobody answered your t/f questions right. Were they clear?

cw
hollygolightly72
03-26-2004, 02:45 PM
The same thing happened to me!! I got 8 reviews and it says NONE of them were used for scoring.

A girl on another board got the same thing. Were we disqualified for some reason? I completed 4 reviews myself. What's the deal?
xcajx
03-26-2004, 02:46 PM
same deal Gotham, I posted on another string. I have good reviews too, with the exception of one that is all 1's... I will wait for the site to calm down then give you my averages.

I reviewed 7 and got 7 back.

Also, it does say that we will get marks at 7PMish, but we didn't make it.
GothamWriter
03-26-2004, 02:49 PM
And yet I made the top 4% in the Zoetrope contest with pro reviewers.
xcajx
03-26-2004, 02:50 PM
Ahh Gotham what can you do... 'tis PG and we should be happy for those who did make it. So Congrats to all who did and good luck! Wish i was coming along for the ride.


Okay now I got the last 2 reviews and they are all 2's!!!!! No comments neither! That sucks.


Come on! I was robbed!
Hallama
03-26-2004, 03:22 PM
Fluffy, the scores aren't placed in order, so your last one could be rated higher overall...

Mine went 11 - 10 - 11...for the scores that counted, in that order.
hollygolightly72
03-26-2004, 03:23 PM
OK, this IS total BS.

Now my screen is coming up telling me me first 3 reviews listed were used to score. 2 out of those 3 reviews were the lowest scores out of the 8.

6 reviewers rated me between Good to Excellent on all counts. And 2 of them put my scores between Poor to Fair. So my score was based on the 2 poor scores and 1 good score.

If they based their scores on 5 of those reviews and threw out the lowest and the highest score. At least ONE of those two bad reviews shouldn't have been scored. But BOTH were.
xcajx
03-26-2004, 03:30 PM
oh my god... of the reviews that were used in scoring, they used the 2'-3's with no comments, the 2's with no comments and the 9-11's one with good comments.

Can u say random?

At least they dropped the one that was all 1's!
FluffyUnbound
03-26-2004, 03:47 PM
Apparently if you didn't make the cut it's not going to tell you which reviews were used for scoring until later.

That's just something I read on a board, though, so I don't know if it's true.

I can't even get to see my reviews. I made it, but there is no link to the reviews on the Scripts List Page.
eszyszka
03-26-2004, 03:57 PM
I know what you mean, Gotham. Some people tanked me on really minor formatting errors. Which I considered to be good they weren't major since this is my first script I've written.

I also noticed, some people hated everything, the dialogue, the ending, while the next review will rave about it. My script is a type of crime comedy/thriller and people are saying it's action/adventure which makes me really wonder if anyone read it. There's like 3 gunshots in the whole thing and suddenly it's action/adventure.

I don't know. Two of the scripts that made the Top 1000, which I reviewed as being okay to be nice, were really, really horrible. It makes me mad that I was nice to other writers when they advance with bad material. One is basically a low-budget remake of Scarface with bank-robbing through in. It's just a shame.
matteey
03-26-2004, 03:58 PM
Right there with you Gotham.

My PGL entry made the quarters of Zoetrope--an early draft no less--and I still got pummelled by the torpedo-lobbing novices. I knew this was a distinct possibility, but it still sucks.

Onto Nicholl, Austin, Chesterfield and some qualified readers......
xcajx
03-26-2004, 04:02 PM
my reviews:

1 all 1's no comments
2x all 2's no comments
1 2's and 3's no comments

1 positive at 9-11's nice comments and effort.

1 glowing at 10-12's with comments, but nothing constructive.

1 beaming with 11-12's lots of comments (maybe not constructive, but a lot of praise so I'll keep it.) ;)

But come on... talk about torpedoes...
PeekABooBang
03-26-2004, 04:05 PM
I didn't enter but I did get to review a number of scripts. Four of the five that I rated high made it to the next round. One of them didn't, a drama/comedy involving cupid (the name escapes me).

I noticed one of the TERRIBLE scripts I read actually made it. WTF?? Shocking. Also another one that was below average (IMO) made it.

Good luck to you guys -- I'm sure some of you have good stuff that just didn't make the cut for whatever reason.
FluffyUnbound
03-26-2004, 04:14 PM
My first three reviews say that they were used for scoring.

So far I have only been able to click to the first two, and I got a 7 overall and then an 8 overall.

How the heck did I make it?

That means I have a score lower than 7, since the bottom score was dropped.

Maybe at some point in the next 100 hours the site will let me click to my third "counted" review.
FluffyUnbound
03-26-2004, 04:19 PM
My third "counted" review was a 7 also.

So a 7, an 8, and a 7 advanced you.

That's weirdly low to me for some reason.

I should not have made it.
Writer1
03-26-2004, 04:35 PM
Didn't enter a script here.

It seems this is very similar to triggerstreet, where novices look for any excuse to torpedo a script...to move theirs higher in the rankings.

I'm going to enter Nichol...can I expect the same or are the judges of a higher cailibre?
RKBentley
03-26-2004, 04:39 PM
Dunno if this was there before or not:


If you did not make it into the Top 1000, the reviews that were used to score your submission will be marked as such, at approximately 7:00PM PST on March 26. We apologize for the inconvenience. Three of the reviews were used for scoring, we just need to mark them.
baseballlvr
03-26-2004, 05:04 PM
I understand why people would be irked.

You get nine reviews and they count only three. Yikes!

I'd suggest that until PGL decides to only allow professional readers to review them, then many people are going to be complaining. And many people are going to be wasting their $30.

It doesn't seem the problem lies with people tanking scripts -- it lies with PGL not using ALL reviews in the ratings.
JimBeck
03-26-2004, 05:37 PM
I had to switch to this username, since my new one is limited to the number of posts I can make. Grrr.

Unfortunately. I don't think allowing all reviews to count would work either, because some people only got five while others got nine. So some people would complain about not enough reviews being done.
THamilton
03-26-2004, 05:42 PM
i got 11s ... and 1s. solid, well thought out notes from the 11s, hardly a peep from the 1s.

ah well, i did get some great notes from a few reviews, done dealers, i assume. thanks to those who put some thought into the process.

aslo, best of luck to those of you that advanced. i really hope someone that lurks around here take the crown. as for me, back to the lab. :D
hollygolightly72
03-26-2004, 05:46 PM
For me, it's not about the number of reviews. But the fact of the 3 reviews that ended up in my tally - 2 of them were the lowest scores.

If they followed their own rules, one of those low scores should have been thrown out. I have no idea if that would have changed anything. But it just irks me that they didn't even follow their own rules.

I'm over it now. With the exception of 2 reviews that were obvious tanking, the rest of the reviews were pretty consistent in their scoring and their comments. At least now I have a good idea on what worked and didn't work in the script.
Piiike
03-26-2004, 05:50 PM
my first 3 reviews were hardcore tankers :(
meat pickle99
03-26-2004, 05:58 PM
i advanced w/ pretty mediocre scores as well. doesn't seem like i should have made it either. just goes to show what a crapshoot it is anyway. don't despair
gwhurls
03-26-2004, 06:04 PM
They took the first three in order no matter what they were.

If you look at the URL of your review, they are numbered in the order in which they are recieved. They are also listed on your screen that way.

Everyone is saying the first three on their list are the "ones that counted".

So if your first three reviewers loved you, you're in like Flynn. If they didn't you got cut.

Same as last year, though Fred swears up and down that they drop high/low and that they use three as the common denominator/number of reviews. It just ain't so.
Unknown 1115318040
03-26-2004, 06:46 PM
(This post is missing and can not be restored)</pagetext>
</post>
<post>
<thread>N</thread>
<threadtitle>What kind of PGL BS is this?</threadtitle>
<threadviews>1980</threadviews>
<threadsticky>0</threadsticky>
<poll></poll>
<username>LostDogma</username>
<dateline>1080351060</dateline>
<title>Re: Wow</title>
<pagetext>Wow - that sucks!

I'm glad I didn't enter. But I guess nothing ventured, nothing gained.
xcajx
03-26-2004, 06:47 PM
what really sucks is now those who advanced may feel less of an accomplishment. even though I feel shat on, i don't want to take anything away from those who advanced. live and learn, I simply won't enter again. However, I would like my money back as I feel some of us may have been misled...
hollygolightly72
03-26-2004, 06:55 PM
I e-mailed PglSupport about this. This was their response:

The first five reviews you received were used, then the lowest scores were dropped. You do not know how they questions were weighted so you can't really tell which were you highest and lowest scores.

Does this make sense to anyone?
FluffyUnbound
03-26-2004, 07:03 PM
This actually makes some sense.

If they rated Story and characters higher than dialogue, for example, it could change the way your scores add up.

If your story score got a bump if "Horror" or "Thriller" was checked, that could also make a big difference.

As soon as the scoring isn't straight addition, it creates a layer of doubt about how you actually did.
hollygolightly72
03-26-2004, 07:07 PM
I could understand if it got knocked down a few notches because my entry was a comedy. But I wish they would just SAY that.

If I was being generous in my theory, I would say - If you had a script that was not marked Horror or Thriller in the reviews, you would have had to have gotten 10s - 12s across the board to make it through. Because overall you would have lost points due to genre.

Maybe those horror and thrillers got scored evenly across the board because they didn't lose points for genre.
The Phantom Scribe
03-26-2004, 07:33 PM
Yeah, the scoring seems a little screwy. I had mostly very high scores and a few in the mid-to-lower range and yep, they leaned towards the lower ones for the three. And even then, I probably just missed advancing by a little bit. I even had some "best script I read by far" type comments.

I think some of it may have to do with which reviews/scores came in first. If the first five contained all of your lower score reviews, you're probably out of luck. Still, something doesn't seem quite right since the majority of my scores were quite high.

The real kick in the nuts is that I noticed some god-awful piece of crap I reviewed actually advanced. That's a little tough to deal with. But, one man's trash...

Oh well, it was a 4000-to-one long shot going in anyway you look at it. Just wish the scoring system was a little smarter. Nothing left to do but hope Ben and Matt die of cancer soon. And if that piece of @#%$ I reviewed wins, I'm going on a killing spree.
GothamWriter
03-26-2004, 08:12 PM
Okay, so now the site says that three of my seven reviews were counted for score.

The four that didn't count-

Dialogue- 9
Characters- 9
Story- 11
Overall- 9

Dialogue- 9
Characters- 9
Story- 8
Overall- 9

Dialogue- 7
Characters- 6
Story- 8
Overall- 8

Dialogue- 7
Characters- 4
Story- 2
Overall- 4
The Phantom Scribe
03-26-2004, 08:13 PM
Sleepy, I didn't say I was torped, I'm just saying they used my lower scores for the tabulation, which seems a little off. But what really puzzles me is that there were enough mental defectives out there to score that horrendously amateurish crap script I reviewed high enough to advance. Kinda shakes my faith in mankind.
NikeeGoddess
03-26-2004, 08:46 PM
like judging ice skating in the olympics - the judges seem to score the first skaters lower so they have room to be wowed by later skaters. so, it's only natural that people started off scoring lower and then gave better grades on later reads. but, those chosen should have been much more random rather than just the first 3.
hollygolightly72
03-26-2004, 08:55 PM
Nothing left to do but hope Ben and Matt die of cancer soon. And if that piece of @#%$ I reviewed wins, I'm going on a killing spree.

Thank you for that. It's the best laugh I've had all week. :rollin :rollin :rollin
sleepyhead
03-26-2004, 09:01 PM
There is a lot of this 'torpedo' talk going around.
I'm not saying that it didn't happen, but can someone making those accusations justify their claims?

I don't think that the fact that some scripts got both 1s and 11s is proof that there was a significant number of people, who's soul objective was to disqualify scripts. I honestly believe that there would have been the same level of discrepancy had professional readers been used.
sleepyhead
03-26-2004, 09:33 PM
Oh that sucks Phantom- that they used the lowest scores. That doesn't seem fair.

I hope all this confusion about what did get used and what didn't get used, gets sorted out pretty fast. People have a right to know.

I gotta confess, I was going through the list, holding my breath, afraid that I would see some of the REALLY bad scripts that I reviewed on there. But no. However, the one really excellent script that I read did make it!

You know, the thing it, I'm sure that there are scripts that didn't make it that are a lot better than a lot of the ones that did make it (none of yous peoples scripts, of course). But the thing is, it's all just so subjective.
gwhurls
03-26-2004, 10:51 PM
But the thing is, it's all just so subjective. Which is why I say they should have:

- Randomly assigned scripts, with no choices
- Minimum/maximum number of reviews across the board
- Collect/utilize every review and either total all the points (even if they are weighted) to get the top scripts, or take an average from all the reviews to get the top scripts

None of this "if you get good reviews first you advance, bad reviews first you don't" stuff.

But that makes sense, so they won't. I wonder who came up with this judging method. Fred says he's "in charge of the whole online review period".
JimBeck
03-27-2004, 12:33 AM
hollygolightly72--

What genre was your script?
eszyszka
03-27-2004, 02:17 AM
Sleepy,

I got marked low scores for having a format slip up a couple of times and apparently I made a grammar no-no. This justified several 1's apparently.
JimBeck
03-27-2004, 02:59 AM
Hi Holly,

I have no idea how the scoring was done, but as it has been said, I don't think it was a straight numbers game. Below are the numbers for my drama, which discounts your theory that 10's-12's are needed for a none thriller/horror to advance:


Dialogue, Characters, Story/Plot, Overall

9 11 10 10

6 7 5 6

8 8 9 9


Even though the middle score looks like it would drop the script, it did advance. If we had some kind of analyst in our midst, I bet he or she could look at the reviews of 50 people and figure it out, or at least come really close. Do you know an analyst with some free time?
KeyframeCEO
03-27-2004, 03:24 AM
Which is why I say they should have:...

You know what, f*** all this. There will always be this kind of bitching so long as there is "peer review". There will always be the possibility of "tankers" out there and some people who want to dodge their script needing some work will blame the system, while others will have a legit gripe.

If you want to change the system, write the producers through the PGL website and tell them you'd be willing to pay a higher entry fee (maybe even $50 or $75) if they do not use "peer review" and hire professional readers.

That will change things. Otherwise, this will just keep up, people will keep getting more bitter every year, less will enter the following year and it will end up being 500 entries fighting to get into the Top 1000!
gwhurls
03-27-2004, 03:29 AM
Keyframe,

I have no issue with peer review, or the reviews I got. I assume those were fair. I've not said one word about being tanked. I don't think I was.

I have a problem with the PGL computer and the fact that it didn't work as promised to us by Fred. The high/low scores were not dropped. The first three reviews entered were used, no matter what they were.
KeyframeCEO
03-27-2004, 03:30 AM
I have no issue with peer review, or the reviews I got.

Oh, I know gw, I wasn't talking about anything any one person said. It's just that I read all these posts on the three boards and while they vary a little, it all comes back to the same things.

If everyone knew their script was being reviewed by professionals and only got back a simple form of coverage, I think most people would accept it (or just poo poo the fact they didn't win) and move on. PGL is open to a lot of picking, most of which isn't going to change much.

I still think, at its heart, PGL has something great for everybody. This whole broken system bothers me because it's more than just sour grapes - there were 10,000 entries the first year. 7,000 last year. 4,200 this year. People are saying, "This doesn't work, I'm not going to enter next year".

If that keeps up, PGL will fall apart and we all lose something cool.

Tweaking "how many reviews" or "how they are weighted" or "how the scores add up" or "ban all non-contestants", etc, etc, etc still leaves the essence of the problem intact.

That's all was getting at.

You're cool, no problem-o! :hat
KeyframeCEO
03-27-2004, 03:38 AM
I figured it out and at $75/person, even if LivePlanet hired readers at the top-shelf rate of $50/script, they could still easily make $200k off it with only 7,000 entries. Think if they set it up more legit, they'd get 10k or more. And I'm sure they wouldn't pay $50/script (most companies don't), so LivePlanet would do okay, the writers would feel confident about the judging and the industry would know that finalists were more than just lucky survivors of peer grading.

If everybody was going to hound PGL about changes for next time, that's the kind of change I'd say is worth the time.

Like I said when I won my PGL hat at the first Greenlighter party - "Everybody wins with PGL!" LOL
gwhurls
03-27-2004, 04:11 AM
Tweaking "how many reviews" or "how they are weighted" or "how the scores add up" or "ban all non-contestants", etc, etc, etc still leaves the essence of the problem intact.Thing is that with "pro" review you never know why you do or don't advance. And who really knows who these "pro" reviewers are. For all we know they could be just a bunch of readers from some office somewhere that know as little about the craft as some of us.

I still think it would have been fairer to just use the highest number of reviews, and add 'em up. We all got five, they should have used five.

The numbers we're seeing on the boards prove that something is fishy. But Fred won't look at them. I don't know if it is a legal thing or he refuses to admit their program coding failed.

Anyway, I've wasted a day on this. I'm done.

Good luck to all my buddies in the top 1,000!
blackrooster
03-27-2004, 04:02 PM
KeyframeCEO--

Although this does sound like a good plan, I'm not sure it would work. The numbers of scripts sharply declined once a $30 fee was involved, so I don't think a higher fee, even one that promises being read by "professionals," would get anywhere near a thousand. At $75, it would be the most expensive professionally read contest that I've heard, and with only one grand prize and no additional prizes, it would be hard to enter this contest instead of two others for the same price.

Plus, let's talk professional readers -- I had a run-in with one of these during the first PGL when he read my script, which had advanced to the top 250, and ripped it apart. But when I read his, it was pretty terrible. He started out with a good concept, then sucked out all of the originality and included about a dozen characters with no personality. In essence, this guy could be paid to read my scripts this time around.

Also, I am now friends with a reader for a small, but well known, production company. One of the reasons that he shies away from contests -- the main reason, actually -- is because he believes that most readers are just above the average person. He says that most readers really shouldn't be in the "profession," because it's a lot of work and many are disgruntled. As a test, he submitted his own script to a couple of readers that he works with, a script that I and a bunch of other people really enjoyed, and he received some of the most ridiculous comments I've ever heard.

Now, of course, paying $50 per script would get a better pool of readers, but I don't see PGL forking over that kind of cash.

The system still isn't perfect, but they've made tremendous strides. Let's take a look at the improvements they've made over the past two contests:

1. Increased # of first round advancing scripts from 250 to 1000.

2. Decreased the # of competing scripts from 10,000+ to a little over 4000 by including a $30 fee.

3. Split up the contest to a writer and director.

4. Employed professional readers for the Top 100.

5. Executives will read the Top 100 PLUS they will use a writer's video, coupled with the script, to choose the Top 5.

6. No more stupid Bio Video knocking you down from 250 to 30 before the script is read by anyone but the peer reviewers.
bottomlesscup
03-27-2004, 04:26 PM
Well, it would be your first five VALID reviews that count. It's possible that some of your early reviews were from people whose reviews were DQ'd. If the SRID# in the reviews url represented the review number, my first, fourth, and seventh reviews were used.

As to the titles, I agree that it appears more thrillers and horrors made it, but remember that the rules specifically said they were looking for these genres. Logic would suggest some people didn't enter scripts of another genre. If the pool had more thriller/horrors, so would the winners list.
SebsWrtrDad
03-27-2004, 04:27 PM
Right, right -- I know that's what they were looking for. And I figure more of those types of scripts were submitted. I was just wondering if they were given more wieght.

Hadn't thought about the numbers on the reviews -- didn't even look. Nor did I think about DQ'd reviews. Bummer if I had missed the cut because somebody else screwed up. Ah well - them's the chances you take when you buy your ticket to the ride, right?

------------------------------------------------------------edit: Hey, I know the directors rated scripts as well -- I wonder if they rated differently. Again, no complaints here -- just curious about how things worked.....
gwhurls
03-27-2004, 04:38 PM
I realized something this morning.

I was the one over here defending PGL to everyone for a whole month (and took all kinds of s*it for it), and I was the one that got screwed by the very system I defended.

How IRONIC is that?

Fred told me via email they will not be releasing the information on how they weighted the reviews.

On the other hand he stated he will look into my concerns about the high/low not being dropped: "on Monday with the engineer". Which is all I ever wanted.
SebsWrtrDad
03-27-2004, 04:50 PM
Made the top 1000 so this sure isn't a bitch.

But I noticed that on both my scripts, the high and low got dropped -- as expected.

But ALL my high scores got dropped. One script got two 10's and an 11. I expected the 11 to get dropped, but why the 10's?

Was it the first five reviews in that counted? I also wondered if anyone knew if horror or thrillers were given added weight since they were leaning that way for submissions. Based on titles, it certainly looked that way....

Again, I'm not bitching, just wondering.
gwhurls
03-28-2004, 08:51 AM
Well, it would be your first five VALID reviews that count. It's possible that some of your early reviews were from people whose reviews were DQ'd. If the SRID# in the reviews url represented the review number, my first, fourth, and seventh reviews were used.Thing is that no matter how I jumble them, any five combinations, the lowest wasn't dropped. The only explanation is that the three they used were the only valid ones, so they had no choice. If they tell me that, I'd accept it. But they're not telling me that. We were told everyone had five valid.

It seems to me in those cases, they should use the system to force the scripts without 5 valids back into the mix to get more reviews so they have five valids.

*edit*

And if someone fails a test, that review should be thrown out and they should be made to read/pass tests till they enter a valid review. This time you could fail a test and still get one credit towards your required reviews. My way everyone gets the right amount, and the cheaters are either forced to stop cheating, or drop out.
catz1
03-30-2004, 11:27 AM
You had a much better chance of advancing if you got all high-to-middling scores, ie 6,7,8s than if you got 2 lowish 2-5 and then all high 11-12.

So in other words, if your first three counted reviews looked like this:

7,9,8,6
7,7,6,6,
5,7,8,9

you advanced. While this wouldn't:
2,3,5,4
11,10,12,12
12,10,9,10

So if you had material that split people wildly-- some hated, some loved. Forget it. You had to have material that no one loved, but no one really complained about either.

Also, they seem to have dropped all the highest scores although Fred doesn't explain it this way. I find it too concidental that every person posting their scores has had their highest ones dropped.

Last year, Fred asked all of us on the boards whether we wanted a strictly peer review, strictly pro, or pro-peer hybrid this year, and overwhelmingly people chose the hybrid method. So everyone gets what they asked for!
sleepyhead
03-30-2004, 11:32 AM
Why didn't they just stop offering scripts up to be read after the 5th review?
blackrooster
03-30-2004, 04:12 PM
KeyFrame ...

You mentioned that you had seen the same arguments on three boards ... so there's this one and The Kickass Resource ... what is the other board?
ribandit
03-30-2004, 05:09 PM
blackrooster:

My guess would be the Agony site.

bandit
blackrooster
03-30-2004, 05:51 PM
Hmmm, I'm not familiar with that site? Do you have a link?
ribandit
03-30-2004, 06:43 PM
Try

agonyproductions.com (http://agonyproductions.com)

A group of folks that met on the original pgl boards and started their own production company and writing site in NY.

bandit
KeyframeCEO
03-30-2004, 07:53 PM
KeyFrame ...

You mentioned that you had seen the same arguments on three boards ... so there's this one and The Kickass Resource ... what is the other board?

Yeah, AGONY.

Be warned, though. If you come to the boards just for script/PGL stuff - AGONY has most of the old PGL Board-style silliness, 3 pages of Topics like, "Should I have a Threesome to Keep My Boyfriend?" by girlwholikestowrite.

These two ez boards do a nice job of keeping topics in different areas and focused.

But the AGONY folks are pretty cool too, so it is worth checking out.
catz1
03-31-2004, 11:00 AM
Twice I have registered at Agony and never got a password emailed to me. So I give up. After that description, KeyFrame, it doesn't much sound worth joining anyhow.
KeyframeCEO
03-31-2004, 03:55 PM
It is, I just hate having to weed through all those B.S. topics to find PGL stuff.

Was extra frustrating when I was looking for someone having read my script! LOL
cognomen
03-31-2004, 10:28 PM
What do you expect when your fellow competitors review your scripts?
GunMetalScribe
04-02-2004, 12:34 AM
don't be bitter gothamwriter, just because pgl didn't consider yours, don't playa hate man,

you should be happy for those whose reviews were used and maybe, just maybe your review blows like a cheap whore.
KeyframeCEO
04-02-2004, 07:40 PM
...just maybe your review blows like a cheap whore.

That is EXTREMELY offensive!

Just because a whore is "cheap", doesn't necessarily mean she works any less hard at a good blowjie than a pricey one.