The 'how to improve the F7s' thread

[...Morticia...]

Something I think original, isn't going to be what say Mystique considers original, it's all a matter of taste.

and this is it. i dunno about others but i usually take the ref into consideration when writing. theres some you can push the creativity level a bit further with, theres some that like a good yarn, theres some that are unknown entities and you wing it :lol: the regular refs marking is pretty standard for each game they mark. its about knwing your ref, just like the real game. when harragan was reffing, you knew he wouldn't blow the pea out of his whistle for lying on a player a bit too long, clark you know the 10 will be around 8 before he will ping you.

we'll all write crap that we think is a high 90's and get an 84 ;-) and be pissed but thats life. i find a print out of the refs avatars and a small, sharp knife does the job :lol:

 

[...Morticia...]

fair point by all

maybe we need one such round only then.

:lol:

 

[Jesbass]

From a newbie point of view, restricting the topic of choice would probably push me away. I think I can see what Crusher is getting at, but while it might separate the wheat from the chaff, I think this would make forum sevens less enjoyable overall. Enjoyment is what initially brought me to this competition and enjoyment is what has kept me here so far.

And, to a degree, there already is a theme every week: football. How each writer interprets that theme, or aspects of that theme, is what makes not only writing, but reading, so much fun for me.

 

[Crusher]

at the end of the day when its all done and dusted, I think it would be fairer then if refs all marked according to a standard formula or cross marked.

Yes, I agree that refs all mark things differently but sometimes this is not necessarily the best thing. Again, in my old days as a teacher we may not have restricted anything but we all marked to a formula, and at exam time, we could cross mark.

At the very least I think it would be fair (albeit more time consuming) if 2 refs marked each article for balance purposes.

I believe that although the idea of this concept is to showcase footballing articles, we should also strive for improvement in our own writing skills and balanced marking is the only way to do it unless of course you have the same ref all year. Sometimes the gap between marks is too great which confuses the writer more than anything else.

Do you see where I am coming fromn on this?

 

[...Morticia...]

crusher, you got paid as a teacher, these guys do it for free. its a game, theres nothing apart from a few bragging rights riding on it. yep, when i get a uni essay back for my post grad i will question something if i dont agree with it. in the sevens i wouldnt. the result doesnt affect my grad average. it doesnt affect my career ladder climb. the only thing it affects is my ego. it just gets too hard and time consuming having things cross marked etc for something thats supposed to be fun.

 

[Crusher]

Morticia,

this game is the best way to improve your writing skills. Agreed its only a game but nonetheless the aim should be to hone your skills for when you do need them at grad level.

I'm not worried about ego but I really only want to help. If that means I have to cross mark them then I would do it. I basically want participants to get the most out of this game and if that means balanced marking then so be it. Either way I'll still participate.

 

[...Morticia...]

Morticia,

this game is the best way to improve your writing skills. Agreed its only a game but nonetheless the aim should be to hone your skills for when you do need them at grad level.

I'm not worried about ego but I really only want to help. If that means I have to cross mark them then I would do it. I basically want participants to get the most out of this game and if that means balanced marking then so be it. Either way I'll still participate.

i meant grade average :lol: ah, i have two degrees, a post grad in emergency nursing and am now doing post grad in psych and masters once i finish. dont be misled by my atrocious spelling and grammar ;-) its what spell checks are for. i play sevens for light relief from the grind of study and work. see, theres my ego at work right there :lol:

 

[Crusher]

you bragger you

I hope you understand I just want to help.

 

[...Morticia...]

you bragger you

I hope you understand I just want to help.

:lol: nah just the ego kicking into overdrive when i thought you though i was some spotty faced, prepubescent not quite undergrad

i'm not ragging on you. your suggestions are welcome and dont forget i agreed with you at the start

 

[Crusher]

hey!

I'm not that old

 

[[furrycat]]

Its a suggestion that myself and unit have said before.

The idea of testing out using two referees on a match and having articles marked by each without discussion. For example, if Ref 1 scored it 88 and Ref 2 scored it 84, then the score will be 86. If the difference is greater than five, then they need to discuss it to try and determine a score or have a third marker.

The problem is resources. We don't have that many refs running around unfortunately and could create problems.

 

[...Morticia...]

it seems to be a problem that people cant cop their marks. one ref, four refs what does it matter? you get a mark determined by the ref, relative to other artcles in the game. you might get a sh*tty 84 one game and a passable 90 in another game. if you look at the sevens leaderboard and read say jessbass and bubbles artcles, can you not honestly say that their artcles were consistently stand outs most rounds? i think that proves that marking is relatively consistant. four refs wouldnt have changed that. its a game, its interpretation and i think the refs are doing a great job, even when they give me a sh*tty 84 and i have to stick pins in my voodoo doll and wish the plague of a million locus' on them

and crusher, i never assume someones old. like me, you could be turning 21 again, again, again ;-)

 

[antonius]

Crusher, ATM we have three regular refs, with four or five casual refs, I know personally that I just don't have the time to be cross checking mine, and other refs marks, apart from the fact that it would be difficult logistically on the net,(we aren't all sitting together in a room at the same time.) From my point of view I'm happy to expand on my marking with writer via PM if they so wish, and have done so several times. As long as it doesn't become a whinge fest. As Mort says, it's about knowing your ref and using that knowledge, just like the real game LOL.

 

[antonius]

Just further to the using two refs and averaging their mark. I can see that becoming a tool for serious disputing of the marking If one ref marked something as say 90, and the other 82, straight away the writer will want explanations, and see it as a logical tool for complaint, when in fact the piece just didn't grab ref #2. It also would make the refs uncomfortable marking articles. I know some of the refs go hard on spelling/grammar, where-as I don't, unless it spoils the reading of the article, then I'll deduct marks. There is just one reason why you get differences, others could be that a person writes something funny, one ref might think it is, the other doesn't, someone might write verse, one ref likes verse another doesn't and so on.

 

[Crusher]

This may sound silly but what if all the refs noted in a thread what they like and dislike so we can do some serious sucking up in our articles

 

[Crusher]

it seems to be a problem that people cant cop their marks. one ref, four refs what does it matter? you get a mark determined by the ref, relative to other artcles in the game. you might get a sh*tty 84 one game and a passable 90 in another game. if you look at the sevens leaderboard and read say jessbass and bubbles artcles, can you not honestly say that their artcles were consistently stand outs most rounds? i think that proves that marking is relatively consistant. four refs wouldnt have changed that. its a game, its interpretation and i think the refs are doing a great job, even when they give me a sh*tty 84 and i have to stick pins in my voodoo doll and wish the plague of a million locus' on them

and crusher, i never assume someones old. like me, you could be turning 21 again, again, again ;-)

dispite all your pimples Morticia, I still love you

 

[Crusher]

Crusher, ATM we have three regular refs, with four or five casual refs, I know personally that I just don't have the time to be cross checking mine, and other refs marks, apart from the fact that it would be difficult logistically on the net,(we aren't all sitting together in a room at the same time.) From my point of view I'm happy to expand on my marking with writer via PM if they so wish, and have done so several times. As long as it doesn't become a whinge fest. As Mort says, it's about knowing your ref and using that knowledge, just like the real game LOL.

I'm happy to put my hand up as a ref or casual ref next year if required


cheers
Crusher

 

[...Morticia...]

This may sound silly but what if all the refs noted in a thread what they like and dislike so we can do some serious sucking up in our articles

been there, done that. i think last year. you'll need to troll my friend ;-)

 

[...Morticia...]

I'm happy to put my hand up as a ref or casual ref next year if required


cheers
Crusher

well i'm screwed then. a freaken school teacher reffing :roll: :crazy: :lol:

 

[LeagueNut]

I haven't thought this suggestion out too much, so it probably won't make much sense ... :crazy:

BUT in an attempt to encourage more people to join the ranks of the referees, would it be worthwhile to make them "anonymous"?

We could set up one new user account (called "The Referee"), and all the refs could PM their scores to this user. Once all the scores are in for the round, "The Referee" would post the results in each thread.

It might make the job of referee more attractive to people who like the idea of judging and giving out marks, but aren't too keen to have their decisions scrutinised by disgruntled forummers. (I know it doesn't happen too much, but it can still be a deterrent)

On the down side, people may like to know who their referee is and construct a post accordingly. Personally I've never taken that approach, but I can see how it might be useful. Having anonymous refs would remove this option.

Thoughts?