Should they have allowed non-entried 'reviewers' in PGL?

[roshrin]

What percentage of reviewers do you think are entrants listed under another ID?

I'm talking semi-torpedo here. Obviously if you have your script entered and you want t olow ball others you won't want to do it under your own ID. If you get caught you will be disqulified. So what do you do? You do your req 3 and then get a new ID and sign up as a reviewer and start lowballing as many as you can. Not 1s and 2s but 3s, 4s and 5s. They can quickly search a script for the answers to T/F and throw in a quick blurb, post and go on to the next. How many of these people do you think are out there?

At least if it is your own script at risk for getting caught, the chances of torpedoers is greatly reduced. Just how many 'real' reviewers come to just read and review anyway?

Can't we just have peer review?

Hopefully they'll take a close look at 'reviewers' that enter 15 reviews....

just
need
to
get
into
the
top
1000

[SlackWriter]

I'm as nervous as you are, but I think there is no real way for us to know. So, I'm just sitting on pins and needles waiting for tomorrow. I think I have a good chance to make it, but there are just too many uknowns to consider.

Still, I have made up my mind that if I do not make it in the top 1000, I'm not going to give up. I'll just polish up my entry, and keep working on my other stories.

Gotta keep the faith.
(sounds weird fo rme to say that, considering that I'm agnostic :lol )

[cruelmessenger]

The way I see it, they will either disqualify dualies if they are caught (and) eliminate all reviews by such people. While there is a possibility some jokers will get away with murder, it seems PGL3 has a system in place (emphasis on 'seems') and there is a drawback. For the sake of arguement let's say everyone does it. Review required three (no torpedo) then sign on as a dualie/triploli/quintet whatever and hand out the put downs like they were dealing a deck of cards. Keep in mind everyone does it. So it is possible that someone is doing it to them as well.

Those in the director's category won't do torpedoes for the most part. They will read sp's as potential scripts that they (or others) might direct. I suspect most good reviews (maining constructive and fair) will come from this camp. On a related note, I am a little miffed that writers don't review the short films. I kind of miss it.

As for guest reviewers who did not enter the script or the director's category- what is the gain of torpedoes? There isn't one.
I suppose it could be 'looking out' for one's buddy. But if they pick a script to down and like it, I would say that they would not shoot it down. Take for example that Werewolf sp everyone's hyped about. You know the one. Let's say John Doe finds it and wants to deep six it because his talentless hack friend entered- or his bitch girlfriend, or one the same. Dum-dum reads it and is told to rip on it. But it is 'so freakin uber cool' he says, "you know, I don't know if it will win, but I would pay to see that!"
Joe Teenagers they may be, but they may also be fanboys. Fanboys will not knowingly shoot down genre sp'that they get off on.

Yes I'm being optimistic. Yes there will be torpedoes by those who don't bother to take their heads out of the sand much less their a$$. But you seen most of the scripts I'm sure. Are you going to torpedo scripts? No. But you will be honest. And because the review process is anymous, your low scores will be seen as 'torpedoes'.

[CeeDub1]

Realistically, I don't think there is much to worry about. People who spend time planning to defeat others will lose because they didn't plan to win for themselves. In addition, if an individual is planning to torpedo scripts they are not gonna make a dent with 4000 entries. Five minutes after hatching their plan they will realize the benefit is negligible. There would have to be an organized group of people to make the effort worthwhile. If they have the ability to make such an organization they are not going to waste their efforts on a stupid script contest.

You guys seem paranoid, are you taking the pot? ;)

cw

[SlackWriter]

I was BORN paranoid! The minute I was delivered from my mother's womb, I knew that doctor was up to something when he slapped my butt! :lol

[roshrin]

CeeDub,

There is nothing to worry about unless you are the one that get's hit. I fully expect to make into the 1000 but just dont see the reasoning to let just 'anyone' enter as a reviewer. At least as a script writer you have some idea of what is expected. This is supposed to be a peer review, not the writer's girlfriends review.

Why give the sleazeballs a chance to 'cheat'?

[psychicmuse]

As a reviewer only this time, I take offense at your suggestion that reviewers are signed up to the contest, for the sole purpose of ruining other's chances.

That's an ugly portrayal of a group of people who probably have absolutely no vested interest in the outcome of the contest, but just want to help.

Its not fair, and some of us, are only doing this, becuase we really enjoy the thrill of reading some good screenplays, after reading bad ones. Some of us just want to help Project Greenlight along, because we believe its a good cause.

I read one really, truly good script that was a mockumentary. I loved it, but I had concerns about it.

One of them, was that I worried that some of the lines were taken from other things I'd seen.

I would have definitely checked it out.

But if that wasn't true, the script was @#%$ HILARIOUS.

I gave it all tens.

[SlackWriter]

Wow. All 10's out of 12. I think I saw another post that liked that one, so I think that one has a pretty good shot at making it to the next level.

[roshrin]

I don't mean ANY offense to the people who are real reviewers such as yourself...I am just pondering the number of real reviewers vs the fake ones. We will never know that number and I can only hope ratio greatly favors the real ones.

I truly appreciate reviewers who want to come in help out for their enjoyment or for the aid of the contest. I knew a few from back at the PGL1 BB days.

But as eveyone kinda knows, the laws of averages and the high number advancing should all be in our favor.

[FluffyUnbound]

I have no doubt that there are lots of sincere reviewers.

But you can be sure that there are dualie tank reviewers too.

It's a virtual certainty. If you can think of it, someone has done it.

On balance, I think they should have prevented you from reviewing if you weren't a paid entrant to the screenplay or directing contest. You could always join Zoetrope if you want to read scripts and offer constructive insight. Leaving the "barn door" open for cheaters does not behoove a contest with a large and significant prize - even if it creates an opportunity for some people to participate and enjoy it, as it did in the case of some honest non-entrant reviewers.

I also don't understand the whole "username" thing this time. If there are no message boards, and if there is no username on the script, there is no reason for PGL to not require you to sign up under your real name. This would give Liveplanet a very easy way to control the contest and who is reviewing:

The signup name should = the name on the CC you use to pay. It's a really simple control.

That way there would only be 1 account per person, and it would be easy to check.

[gwhurls]

On balance, I think they should have prevented you from reviewing if you weren't a paid entrant to the screenplay or directing contest.Then there would be less reviewers, and less reviews. Then the top and bottom scores probably wouldn't get dropped, and like last year, everyone would feel cheated.

It is a no-win situation.

[gwhurls]

. double post. ignore

[THamilton]

Unfortunately, it's just part of human nature to tear others down to make yourself look better. It’s not hard to imagine that there were quite a few people that did this, consciously or otherwise.

As for me, I wanted to see a great script, and would have rewarded it accordingly. Hollywood's tastes hinge largely on trends. The way I see it, if a great movie comes about from this process, it could very well kick off a trend where unknowns are given more opportunities. Perhaps like the success of Survivor, PGL success could spawn countless imitators.

I know that's an assumption, but that's what motivated me to give every script a thorough read, and my best intentions to lavish praise upon it.

[sleepyhead]

Think about it. If there ARE enough saboteurs out there to make a significant dent in the competition, doesn't it even the playing field? You know, turn it into a bell curve sort of thing? Everyone gets hit.
And then... there is this whole business of taking away the highest a lowest scores. Statistically, chances are that your script will not be reviewed by more than one of these supposed 'saboteurs', so their review of your script won't count anyway.

[psychicmuse]

I find it difficult to believe that someone who is deliberately running around tanking whatever script he gets.. would be intelligent enough to write something good.

What are the odds? Seems to me if it was good and he knew it, he'd take his chances with the reviews and hope for the best.

Tanking other people so that you win, is an illogical, irrational course. Even the tiniest bit of examination proves that approach to be faulty, ignorant and a waste of time.

Plus, you get tanked for tanking people. None of your reviews count, if you really tank people and sometimes, they can tell if you read it or not.

[Bill Rectal]

Hey, I tanked the hell out of several scripts that stunk to high heaven. But I told them why in great detail. If that gets me diqualified, screw the contest and the two panzies it rode in on.

[FluffyUnbound]

Bill, I consider the verb "to tank" to mean: to give out a low score to a script that did not deserve one, as a means of advancing one's own script.

What you did - giving out low scores to crappy scripts - is actually known as "bitch-slapping".

I had to do some of that, myself.

[Queen Uhuru]

Muse, I think the number of people who tank scripts because they think that will actually help their own chances is actually quite small. Yes, some people are actually that stupid, but not too many.

I think, of the "tanking contingent," that the majority are just sour on Life or their own personal lives and they want to spread the misery around so they find a great experiment like PGL and do everything they can to drag it down. These were the same people who did everything they could to undermine the PGL message boards and community morale.

If someone uses AOL or a dial-up modem, it would be nearly impossible to trace their IP addy and prove that was them. The very next person to log onto the internet through that same IP addy could be a perfectly innocent bystander. Over at my message board, a couple of AOL users are having problems logging in because most of the spam and the trolls have come from AOL connections and since they just wouldn't go away, I had to ban the IP addy they used.

Anyway, the sour folks who lead with their egos and want people to bow down to them and if they don't get to play that way, then they'll spoil the game for everyone else, are most likely to sign up with numerous dualies to slash through as many dreams as they can.

Since there's nothing that can be done about it because the rules only apply to the top 10, why sweat it? You just pick yourself up and keep on keepin' on. No biggie.

Good luck with your script wherever you shop it. I know you've been working on your story for a long time.

[scripter1]

There are people who believe in PGL's theory and goal but do not have scripts to enter OR are "above" it. Maybe some really great writers or readers who understand the business and just have some free time on their hands and want to be involved in the process.

The people with nothing to lose and nothing to gain except for helping others out are the ones you WANT reading your script. They will give constructive feedback and will rate scripts fairly.

THEY are the ones that counteract the torpedoes.