Yeah, I agree totally with John Kelly when he says, the longer you write sketches on the site, the better you become and the more responses you tend to get. Just keep writing as John said.
What's the point? Page 2
Try critiquing other peoples work and getting yourself noticed. We owe you nothing, we've given you a free site with a popular community and if you put the effort in, you'll get some back.
Quote: Chimes of Freedom @ February 9, 2008, 1:23 PMThere are people flipping burgers at McDonalds who could be pro-writers if they'd just take a little advice from the right quarter.
Don't worry Chimes you'll make it one day
Quote: Chimes of Freedom @ February 9, 2008, 1:27 PMDo you want fries with that?
Yeah, and a couple of A levels please.
Furthering the initial point I cite the current competition as an example.
Apart from mine and Aids entry of course 
the quality for this one is imho of a relatively low standard and to be honest I don't really want to vote for any of them. A bit like abstaining from an election 'cos you feel the candidates are all not worthy!
So, do I begrudgingly vote for what I feel is the best of a bad bunch or do I abstain and fear the wrath of fellow entrants for not voting?
I must admit that compared to say Writersdock there does seem less praise for praise sake and there is generally more talent floating around but there are still some inexplicable positive comments on work that is patently below par.
Aid and I will never make it in the industry 'cos, apart from my not being particularly funny, I have also let him down by being forced into getting a job working unsocial hours thus not being able to meet up and work with him ongoing.
I say that just so's that no one feels that I have an agenda in posting this.
Just like to say how I see it. Sorry.
I tend to agree that the sketch comp often throws up some bizarre choices - is that due to cliques, or because humour is so subjective? I think the former to be honest. But I'm not bothered too much by that - it's not about who gets the votes, but about promoting the discipline of writing sketches to a theme. I obviously don't have the discipline as I've only entered the once (nul points).
Quote: Badge @ February 9, 2008, 1:45 PMI tend to agree that the sketch comp often throws up some bizarre choices - is that due to cliques, or because humour is so subjective? I think the former to be honest.
Fair comment.
I hope you're right as, if still allowed 
, will continue to post work for honest critique.
Quote: Badge @ February 9, 2008, 1:45 PMabout promoting the discipline of writing sketches to a theme.
Correct.
Plus and I'm going to say it, "It's just a bit of fun."
These are definitely the reasons posts don't get responses.
Too long is probably the biggest one. If I have to scroll down more than three times with my mouse wheel I just won't read it. I'm just not prepared to invest my time in something which may turn out, after an hour's reading, to be crap.
And if the piece is short but not very good, unless I can clearly see why it isn't very good I won't respond. I'm not prepared to write 'don't like' on such pieces without leaving any helpful or constructive commentary.
I posted a howler of a sketch a few weeks back. It got 2 replies and I really was lucky to have got even that.
I got the message anyway, which was that everyone else agreed it was shite. Fair enough. It happens. I really wouldn't take it so personally or to heart.
And by the way I have seen lots of newbies get heaps of praise for their first or second post. I'm sorry but you are not right.
Quote: Chimes of Freedom @ February 9, 2008, 1:23 PMI know from experience that the writer in question will tell me to shove my advice where the sun don't shine.
>_< 
Chimes, you're seriously a very funny guy or gal (no sarcasm) but this quote has to be the most ironic thing I've ever read. No one can claim they want less unwarranted praise and fairer crits and then bite back when a crit demonstrates a clear problem with their writing.
I've read the thread and I didn't see much hostility to the poster, just reasons for his query.
What's the point for Jimmy? I'm ignoring the sketch comp as I never go there, so can't comment.
1)This is a busy forum, no one is paid to invest time or effort into a sketch / script.
2)That there are cliques, I wouldn't so much call it cliques as selecting sketches by authors you know will usually hit the spot for you. That's not cliquey, that's sensible use of your scarce time.
3) We've all had stinkers or invisible posts.
4) This is by far the best place on the net to get a fair crit. There are negative and positive reviews, all usually constructive.
It seems frustrating when people post their work here and expect reviews if they rarely comment on other people's work. Jimmy's been here five months and made 16 posts prior to this thread. Less than one post a week isn't taking an active part. To me, that's taking, without giving something back. And then complaining about a free gift.
The answer to attracting more crits is to make yourself more visible, by critting other people's work and getting them to recognise your name and return the favour. It's a CO-OPERATIVE and not a FREE REVIEW SERVICE. The more you contribute, the more you get back.
Sorry to be so blunt but taking part is the best way to participate.
I've been known to put the boot in, but I only slag stuff that's really shit.
David Bussell and Stuart laws both posted sketches I didn't like, then stuff i thought was excellent. I had no trouble telling them. I've just read a 30 minute piece by Perry Nium which was also excellent. As Adam says, you can't read it all, but i try to make an effort.
The junkmales think i have some agenda with their work - I don't, it's just piss-weak. Anyone who takes criticism personally will never succeed.
I think I'm with a lot of people in that it's very difficult to find the time to critique lots of stuff. I always pop by the critique section and the overly long sketch post caught my eye. But only in the sense of: haven't got the time for that. Also, the fact that there are minimal replies to a posting is often indicative of quality.
I'll only comment when I think the sketch deserves praise or I feel I can say something that would either be helpful or constructive. I don't want to just say: "that was shit" just to let everyone know that I spent time to read the sketch.
I must admit to feeling a little disheartened when I see a post has no replies to it, especially if it's a short one. I try and spare a bit of time (perhaps partly because when I post something up myself I occasionally get involved in a discussion which I am conscious others might see as hogging the forum in some way. Entertaining though!)
However, I've had offerings bomb down the page with little or no response and feel it's a little off to pull a grump when this happens.
Quote: Chimes of Freedom @ February 9, 2008, 1:23 PMWhenever I open a posting, I begin reading and ask myself:
1) Is this professional-quality comedy writing
2) If not, can it be turned into pro-quality by making a few changes?
If the answer to either question is 'yes', I'll usually comment.
However, sometimes the answer to the second question is a resounding 'YES!" but I know from experience that the writer in question will tell me to shove my advice where the sun don't shine.
So I don't comment.
There are people flipping burgers at McDonalds who could be pro-writers if they'd just take a little advice from the right quarter.
I think, Chimes, that the way you couche your critiques can be a little adversarial. You must remember that sometimes people have put a lot of hard work into their stuff (I'm obviously talking from personal experience here) and you need to be sensitive. I'm not saying don't be honest, I'm just saying be sensitive.
I also think your habit of rewriting others' material is a little questionable. Whereas I'd say this is not so bad with a sketch, or a few lines, I was a trifle bemused that, with my sitcom, with carefully constructed characters, you chose after reading the first half-a-page scene to redraft it for me! Seems rather, dare I say it, pompous. While the idea of increasing the joke-count may have been valid, the way you wrote the characters' voices was not, and while I got lambasted from several quarters for rejecting the changes, I think it's often more sensitive to explain how something could be made better in your opinion than to actually do it. It depends, of course, but it's like directing a play: it's not very professional as a director to keep jumping in and say: "I'd do it like this". It also smacks more of showing off than of a genuine desire to help.
I mention this partly because I feel you may be addressing me in your above comment ^^ and while I did tell you to shove your advice where the sun don't shine, I am open to suggestions and don't want you to think that I'm not. Your suggested tweak of one of my one-liners was a good one IMO.
Quote: Little Jimmy Junior @ February 9, 2008, 12:26 PMThe whole point of this forum for me was to have like minded people critique my writings (good or bad) and for me to learn from them. Instead what I have found is that nobody bothers (may just be an indication of how bad it really is). Whereas other, more "established" posters on here get reply after reply, and some of the praise that is given astounds me (e.g. J K Rowling/JR Hartley sketch). Is this praise given because people don't want to give "bad" criticism or just because they feel if they don't say good things then people will start to slate their work?
Anyway enough of this mad ramblings. I'm sure I've bored you enough.
It is cliquey and some people praise materials that are just dead flat. If you visit often enough you catch on to who they are and just ignore them. They are yea-sayers who yea-say the work of their friends and expect it back.
Both parties write drivel (usually punchline-oriented).
There honestly is no better comedy writing site available than this one. There are some talented people here (and some people without talent but who know it when they see it) and they will give honest critiques and helpful advice when it is convenient for them. They don't have to read what they don't wanna read.
Chances are very high that if you posted something for critique and received almost no replies, then your piece was either too long, poorly formatted, riddled with grammatical and/or spelling errors, or it just plain sucked shite.
Which do you want to be, boy, a yea-sayer or an accomplished writer? If it is the latter, then develop some empathy and only post work that would impress YOU. Work those mutherf**ken lines until they are short and sharp. Post it when you know you can't do anything more to those lines. Format the piece so it's easy on the eyes. Spell checking is an easy thing to do these days---do it.
Quote: Chimes of Freedom @ February 9, 2008, 3:31 PMYou're absolutely right to say my posts can appear insensitive sometimes. It's something I'm aware of and I'm working on it.
I think we'd all agree that something which causes no offence when said in real life with an appropriately friendly tone and facial expression can cause huge offence when written down and posted on the net. In short, written words are often open to several very different interpretations.
Also, on the net as in real life, a stranger's motives are always open to question.
In rewriting the short scene from your script, my aim was to demonstrate how very small changes can sometimes make a HUGE difference to a script's smoothness and/or funniness.
When offering critiques and advice, I tend to avoid treading on the same toes twice and usually reserve my words of wisdom/shite (strike out that which does not apply) for those who want them.
I choose to read the work and ignore who's written it. And then try and sensitively critique if I have anything to say. It's the only honest way to go about things IMO. You can tie yourself in knots confusing the artist with the work.