Quote: Tom G @ April 16 2009, 5:25 PM BSTI don't believe it.
Oh, that's what you meant!
Does anyone fancy writing a joint sketch on here? Page 16
Tom, 3 reasons you are flogging a dead horse:
1. This premise has already failed miserably; nobody in TV will want to go anywhere near it.
2. To continue with this sitcom, shows you have absolutely no idea about how the commissioning process works. If you did, you'd dump this idea and start on something else. As all of this information is available via the Internet, you will look lazy to potential producers.
3. Mr Charity probably failed because it was a poorly written sitcom. However, it may also have failed to garner a decent audience because most people don't want to watch a show based around a charity shop - it's a boring premise.
Please note, at no point have I said your sitcom is badly written. It's not bad at all. I think you have some talent, if you didn't, I wouldn't have wasted all this time talking to you. You're a decent writer, I just wish you'd put your efforts and ability into another vehicle.
Oh dear. This thread is slipping into the realms of all that is bad with forums.
Why does anybody really worry about what Don says? If you feel he has a valid comment then choose to weigh it up and act on it, or if you think he doesn't then ignore it. I'm sure he won't be bothered either way. He doesn't need to exhibit any credentials as a writer. In the context he's operating in here he is merely a viewer / reader.
As seems to be the case in any gathering of people, whether it's real or virtual, cliques and counter-cliques form and when a voice comes along and upsets the apple cart then it all becomes a bit silly, egos get bruised and people back their mates etc etc.
There is never an excuse for being rude to fellow contributors and as others have mentioned already, by and large this place is fairly free from drongos.
Don hints that he is perhaps a TV insider and I for one have no reason to doubt his bona fides. Because he does so he *might* have a better idea on some things, but then again he may not.
Over the years many people who have been paid to spot talent have failed miserably to do so, most high profile artists in the fields of music, art, literature etc have many stories to tell about being rejected. When I was in music these self-same people (A&R men) where frequently referred to as Umm and Ahh men. They wouldn't have known what was good or indeed bad if it bit them on the arse!!!
Nobody is right or wrong when it comes to valuing artistic merit. One man's meat as they say.. (please no jokes) I always work on the idea that if a reasonable percentage like what I do then that's Ok. If 100% hate it then there may be an issue.
I think all this is becoming tiresome and the thread should go back on-topic for those who wish to participate in its purpose. I expect that the author is less than pleased with what seems to have been a harmless bit of fun being dragged down an unpleasant path.
And Don... your Avatar keeps making me think that it's the cover of Deep Purple in Rock
Quote: don rushmore @ April 16 2009, 5:55 PM BSTTom, 3 reasons you are flogging a dead horse:
I don't want you to think I am just attacking you because I didn't like your comments. I think it is valid and its something others have said.
I don't think you expressed it greatly but thanks for explaining it further. I feel that on this thread though you have appeared a bit "holier than thou" and I just wanted to know what your history was. I didn't mean give us your name and address simply just say you were a Producer, Director, Actor, Writer or whatever.
Obviously you don't want to reveal that though.
I'll let it drop now. Perhaps we should get back to the joint sketch competition.
Perhaps you'd like to take part! 
Team Renaissance
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6. Tom G
7.
Quote: Blenkinsop @ April 16 2009, 6:03 PM BSTI think all this is becoming tiresome and the thread should go back on-topic for those who wish to participate in its purpose. I expect that the author is less than pleased with what seems to have been a harmless bit of fun being dragged down an unpleasant path.
Thanks Blenkinsop. 
So to recap, most of us had fun and want to carry on in the knowledge that it's not a perfect way to write the best sketch. That would require real life meetings I'm sure. Instead we're doing it in a conveyor belt style for fun and practice and if some people like it that's great and if some don't that's par for the course. Let's individually decide whether to take on board or dismiss the criticism given and then move on to the next one!
I believe Craig had an idea to start us off - are you still happy to do that Craig? I think a few people are ready to continue...
Jx
Hello. I'm confused now. Is it same teams as before or what.
Quote: Blenkinsop @ April 16 2009, 6:03 PM BSTAnd Don... your Avatar keeps making me think that it's the cover of Deep Purple in Rock
That's it, you've gone too far. 
I don't care what Don's done no one should be linked to Deep Purple in such an offensive way.
And for my twopennorth: I'm as sensitive as the next virtual person but if you put it on critique it is fair game. I guess in the professional world words will not be minced so if we aspire to that we should maybe get used to it. I also think critique can be a bit cosy sometimes but am not sure this is such a terrible thing.
Hi Big Fella (Why does that sound so wrong? )
I'm trying not to be too bossy but we're in danger of going round in circles so how about if the next person to post decides if we stick with whoever's left of the original teams (making room for anyone new) or if we make it up as we go along?
I'm happy with either but think we should try to get it started again quite quickly!
Go for it BF!
Jx
Let's keep the attitude toned down. Return to colloborative sketch writing posts before you make me think about moving this thread to Crit (and making it Paul's problem ... I joke Paul).
Don is entitled to his opinion but whatever role he has in TV, it neither qualifies nor disqualifies his right to an opinion. In that respect, MarcP is spot-on. Don's role may add weight to his opinion but it does not validate his opinion. Only the writers can choose to validate the comments, or otherwise. Even the greatest commissioner is still using subjectivity in his / her decision-making process. Subjectivity means errors of judgement just waiting to snare.
TomG and Craig Hosie, crit is part of the writing game. Some crit will be fair and useful, some will not. It is the writer's job to decide what is useful and how they learn from it. So take the criticism, evaluate it and move on with good grace. TomG has moved more to this position, so tis good.
I don't want to log on tomorrow to find this has dragged on. I'm relying on you people to make my job a pleasure not a chore. So follow Jane's lead and return this thread to the original purpose, please.
Or maybe time to start a fresh thread?
Crikey, I nip off for a lovely buttery piece of toast and this thread's expanded exponentially!
This seems to me to be an "argument" for nothing. It's hardly relevant. Anyone should be entitled to express their true opinions and it should be received gratefully given they took the time to read and comment. Preferably there should be some direction as to what was "wrong" or a suggestion to improve, as we all want to develop our writing. The exception to the above being if there's consistently rude/offensive/negative comments regardless of the content.
Criticism can be hard to take, but I'd rather get some honest helpful criticism than have stuff ignored (if the comment's not "this is brilliant" it's nice to get an opinion as to where it could be improved). And then have the right to decide whether I agree or not. After all, tastes vary (or we'd all be listening to folk music and eating marmite, for example).
On topic, I thought the sketches were decent, I liked the pace and visuals of Empire Ignite's sketch and enjoyed it very much. However, I do take Don's point about reference to other sketches and using recycled lines - I like to think I come up with new ideas too, and not having an encyclopaedic knowledge of comedy shows, some lines can be lost on me. But I do think there is a place for "reframing" as Sooty puts it, where it is funny, and uses the lines for effect and gives some familiarity.
It was an experiment on the writing process - I think perhaps the existing references were used because we weren't sure what the other writers' tastes were. And using the general idea of "comedy" and external references was a nice "safe" first option as it seemed a fertile furrow for ideas. I'm sure the next sketches will be different and more varied in content.
We shouldn't just give each other a pat on the back that we managed a sketch in future, now we've done it. How about once written could debate which bits could have been improved, what worked, etc?
Anyway I think I'm trying so say I like the criticism and debate (even when I don't), but should keep the arguing and shouting down. You'll wake the baby up!
I seem to have got caught up in this unintentionally.
My intial point was, that Don's criticism wasn't really criticism, it was more "Tom, this is shit".
Now, I don't know about any of you but when somebody says something you have done is shit, whether it is or not you don't go "Thanks for the feedback".
My response to Don, re: Tom's Charity Shop script, was approached with the same integrity as Don's...bad mannered and unconstructive. I'm sorry, but it's only natural for me to be nice to people and for some weird reason I expect the same in return. I was angered by Don's reply to Tom, but funnily enough after I made my post Don then actually posted a more in-depth analysis you could say, of Tom's script.
The thing is with the internet forums, unlike with scripts, you don't type:
(in a pleasant, helpful and constructive manner)
DON: Tom, you are FLOGGING A DEAD HORSE.
Basically, if you leave enough room in your sentences for it to be taken out of context, the chances are it will be.
Let's all be friends and take the piss out of each other, in a good way.
Sorry, I can only be serious for so long before my head hurts.
If anyone is still interested in trying again, please pm me (letting me know if you have a starting point) and we'll crack on.
Then we could try RobOs approach of giving everyone involved the chance to suggest sharper lines or whatever (on a new thread) before we post on critique.
If it doesn't carry on, it was fun while it lasted.
And on the plus side this does show how passionate everyone is about good writing!
Jx
Agree with you RobO.
Criticism is of course absolutely great. As long as it has a point and it is backed up so to help the writer improve - opposed to dishearten and deflate.
and Timbo was right...a fresh thread would be nice.
What's going on with the joint sketch now?