Ideas for Competition Outline #1

ADR Originals will not just be home to blog posts and forums but also to creative writing contests. We want to know what you think would be good competition rules and guidelines. We’ve written up a draft of ideas we have and are interested to hear from our community.

Competition Overview

Audertist Originals is hosting a writing and reading competition! In it, both writers and readers will be able to participate and win prizes, varying from a free premium account on ADR to real cash!

For further information and clarifications, please visit our competition guidelines [here]. The competition overview is as follows:

Writers: Write a story in response to the provided prompt. After submissions are closed, they will enter a short period of deliberation and grading. The top 10 works will then be released to the public for voting. The top 3 placements will be finalized through this vote, so make sure to share the event once the time comes!

Readers: After the top 3 is decided, read and write a review of one of the three, guided by the provided prompts. Then, just like in the writing portion, the top 10 works will be deliberated before being released to the public for voting. Unlike the writing submissions, reader reviews can be posted publicly as soon as the reader submits their review to the ADR team. The grand prize for the readers’ event will be an accumulation of the points generated by votes, so be sure to share the event once the time comes!

This time, we at ADR want to celebrate the re-launch of the Audertist site with the theme of rebirth and renaissance. Through this competition, we hope to encourage our users to ask, what is a good story? What makes a good read? And above all, have we truly experienced the joy of writing and reading?

The writing prompt for this competition is below. The reading prompts will be released after the top 10 works are finalized, so make sure to follow our account and be notified for when that happens.

Prompt: [X] was reborn under the good intentions of a mage who wanted to change the world. After hearing the mage’s plan, however, [X] refused to take action and instead…

Bonus Challenge: Title your work using ADR as its acronym.

Guiding questions for the writer:

  1. Who is [X]?
  2. What were the mage’s “good intentions”?
  3. In what way did the mage want to change the world?
  4. Why does the mage know about [X]?
  5. Why is [X] reluctant to follow the mage’s plan?
  6. What does [X] do instead of following the mage that resurrected them?

Guidelines

  1. Qualification process
    Participating users must tag 3 other active accounts in order to be qualified for participation. The account used to tag 3 other accounts must be included in the document title of the submission in addition to the platform it is used on.
    *Each account is limited to one submission per season (one for writer and one for reader competition)
  2. Prompts & Submissions
    Prompts are meant to provide a subject to write about. Submissions must correlate to the prompts in some way with an obvious form of interpretation. Submissions will be graded higher for creativity and execution of interpretation.
  3. NSFW Submissions
    Submissions are not limited to SFW, but various factors may inhibit a work from getting a higher grade. This includes but is not limited to mindless violence, praise of abuse/assault, and praise of degenerative, discriminatory sentiments.
    This is not to limit submission content but to, in the long run, pursue harmonious ethics and represent them in writing. Life shapes art, and art shapes life.
    In the case of such works, the intent of the writer is not observed but instead the independent theory of the work in writing. The writer in question will be alerted of the violation and can submit a new work without requalification.
  4. Formatting
    Submissions must use 11pt black ink and generic font (Arial, Helvetica, or Times New Roman). Sentences must be set to 1.5 spacing. Paragraphs must have a space after new paragraphs. All this can be found in the general settings/toolbar of popular online document programs and should not be done while in the process of typing.
  5. Word Limit
    All submissions are limited to a maximum of 5,000 words (5k words). Word count does not include titles, footnotes, or similar extraneous additions.
  6. Language
    Submissions must be written in English. If you write best in another language or are considering submitting your work in another language, please make sure to provide a translated version as well, noting what language it was originally written in and how you translated it to English. Machine translation is acceptable, but it may affect a work’s original sentiment/intent, consequently affecting its final grade.
  7. Grammar and Grading
    Grammar will have little impact on the grading process of submissions, but in order to be presentable to public critique, the top 10 works will be subjected to further editing after deliberation. Slang and intentional misgrammar will not negatively impact grading if used effectively. Experimental writing is also encouraged and will not be demerited if executed well.
  8. Top 3 Voting
    The top 10 works and analysis will be deliberated by ADR. The top 3 will be deliberated through user/public vote and will result in the final awarding. All Audertist Originals accounts will have 6 free votes to be spent across both writer and reader competitions. Up to 6 additional votes can be purchased with AudCoins after all free votes are used with each additional vote increasing in price. In the case of a tie, the original grading rubric will be used and ADR will announce the results alongside each submission’s grade.
    The AudCoins spent on additional votes will be redistributed to the winning parties.
  9. Additional Challenges
    There may be additional challenges detailed in the competition that, under normal circumstances, do not influence one’s chances of entering the top 5. However, in the case of a tie or conflicting/similar works, the work that has completed the additional challenge best will immediately advance to the next stage.
  10. Anti-Plagiarism
    To prevent plagiarism, contestants are asked to refrain from posing their works online until the submission period of their subject is over. Do not share your work or grant access to your work to anyone online or in real life unless you have a recorded/documented agreement for the other party to edit/translate/beta read your work. This documentation can be used to clear yourself and the other party of suspicion of plagiarism should it ever arise.
    Plagiarized works will face instant disqualification. Please do not underestimate the state of today’s technology.
    If you are quoting something or someone, please use an MLA citation footnote at the end of your work; the footnote will not count towards your word count.
  11. Special Qualification Method
    The alternative qualification method requires an active Audertist Originals account. If a participating party does not want to follow the general qualification method, they can qualify themself through the following process:
    1. Use an account made, at minimum, a month before the competition to enter through the ADR website. Post the competing story under that account. Then, register it as part of the competition.
    2. Submitted works on ADR must include the competition tag along with the season and year it is competing in.
    3. Registration through the site will require a small amount of AudCoins. It is for this reason that participants are recommended to use an account made a month prior.
  12. For any further inquiries, please email us at [email]

Reader Prompts Rotation

Overall, the goal is not to be correct; the goal is to express your opinion with sound reasoning.

For the reading competition, there are two main options of analysis accompanied by an additional option that goes through rotations due to their rather high-concept rhetoric. The base prompts consist of Basic Analysis and Nonsense Analysis. Choosing the prompt that is neither of these two may result in bonus points depending on the story submissions of the current competition.

Bonus points are awarded based on the completion of the prompt independent from the story it analyzed.

Basic Analysis: Main goal is to deconstruct the story and describe what happens while also relaying its themes to real life experiences. A reflection of the writing.

Nonsense Analysis: Main goal is to take an aspect of the story and tangentially elaborate on it. Other lines from the story must also be used in supporting the elaboration, especially if the original intention of the lines suggest otherwise. A reflection of polysemy.

Period Analysis: Main goal is to analyze how the story represents the current times and how it may or may not have been accepted in another time. Alternatively, one may also predict how future generations may react to the story. A reflection of cultural acceptance and cultural literacy.

Prediction Analysis: Main goal is to make conjectures on how the past or future of the story might look like if the writer continued to write in that direction. A reflection of psychoanalytic writing.

Relationship Analysis: Main goal is to deconstruct the relationships in the story and describe its dynamics as well as why the people involved act the way they do towards each other. This may include people, events, or concepts written about in the story. A reflection of causation.

Revelation Analysis: Main goal is to detail an “aha” moment within the story that the characters had in regards to relevant matters. The following events must then be explained through this “aha” moment, expounding on how a person’s sudden revelation may drastically change their actions and/or thought process. A reflection of revelations.

Medium Analysis: Main goal is to make conjectures on how this story would be received if it was performed through a medium other than writing. The reader may also elaborate on how a production may go about producing such a work, or what the intentions of the production might be represented through the work (besides money). A reflection of transposition.

Perspective Analysis: Main goal is to dissect how the point of view of a character outside of the narrative’s POV may justify their own actions with their own sense of self-righteousness or logic. A reflection of perspective.

Related Articles

guest
1 Comment
Oldest
Newest Most Voted
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
cheshir
21 days ago

Looking back, the guidelines are quite convoluted to read, and some of the qualifying factors are a bit unreasonable. I still like the idea of bringing readers into the competition to give their opinion and have fun with analysis. I definitely would have fun doing the reading part of the competition and seeing everyone else’s responses as both a writer and a reader.
Hopefully we can do this sort of competition in the near future. We may need some more infrastructure on the site to get that voting process down, though…