Subject: EDQ #11 Mixture of Small Things
Posted by: agony
Date: Jun 13 15
A Mixture of Small Things
It's been a while since there was a new entry in this series, and we feel that it's time for a Mixed Bag - a mixture of small issues that the editors would like you to know about, and some questions from you.
This site has been around for a long time, and some of the reasons for our rules and conventions may no longer be very obvious. Old-timers tend to assume that everyone knows how
things work, and why they work that way - but it's not always very clear to newcomers.
A few editors will talk about things they wish you knew, and then if any of you have questions, we'll do our best to answer them.
Posted by: agony
Date: Jun 13 15
A Mixture of Small Things
It's been a while since there was a new entry in this series, and we feel that it's time for a Mixed Bag - a mixture of small issues that the editors would like you to know about, and some questions from you.
This site has been around for a long time, and some of the reasons for our rules and conventions may no longer be very obvious. Old-timers tend to assume that everyone knows how
things work, and why they work that way - but it's not always very clear to newcomers.
A few editors will talk about things they wish you knew, and then if any of you have questions, we'll do our best to answer them.
15 replies. On page 1 of 1 pages. 1
agony
|
Some of you may have seen references from editors to "quiz hopping". We use this term when an author, rather than following editors' instructions on a submitted quiz, submits a different quiz instead. Sometimes the author deletes the quiz, sometimes re-uses the template, and sometimes just makes a new template. It would probably be helpful to you if I explain why we frown so severely on this practice. At one time, we didn't have any rules about any of this. Authors could delete quizzes at any time, and could have as many quizzes in the works as they wanted to. And what we found happening was that if an editor asked for changes, the author would simply give up on that quiz, and start another - almost always with exactly the same problems as the first. A lot of our time was spent working on quizzes that were then deleted, or had the template re-used. Most of these authors were pretty clearly looking for an easier category, or an easier editor. Now, we obviously can't stop someone from deciding that following our guidelines is too hard, and therefore they'll just give up on quiz writing. However, we can do something about authors hopping from category to category, editor to editor, wasting more and more of everyone's time. We've put rules in place to make it clear that editorial work has value. So. Next time you find that, upon submission, your idea is just not going to work, or that the requested changes will mean such extensive re-thinking that it's equivalent to writing an entire new quiz, talk to your editor. Sometimes you'll get agreement that this quiz is just not feasible, and permission to delete. Sometimes you'll get advice about a simple solution that will allow the quiz to be accepted, without major reworking. Sometimes you'll get permission to put the quiz on the back burner for a bit while you work on other quizzes and think of a new approach. You and your editor will come up with something together that's acceptable to both - because this is a collaborative process. Reply #1. Jun 13 15, 4:51 PM |
rossian
|
You've reached your goal, and your shiny new quiz is online for all to play. Then inspiration strikes and you think of a fantastic question - so much better than that weak question six that only 30% of players have answered correctly. Would it really hurt to go back to your quiz and replace it with that brilliant new one, or tweak the wording on another one to make it clearer? Tempting though it may seem, this isn't allowed, since it means that your quiz will then no longer have been properly edited. Once your quiz has been placed online, you need to leave it unchanged, apart from dealing with any correction notes that come in. That fantastic question could instead form the basis for your next quiz, and if a couple of questions in your first quiz haven't worked then you've learned something useful for your next quiz creation. Reply #2. Jun 14 15, 12:59 AM |
JanIQ 
|
Or you might perhaps use that fantastic new question as a "single question". If you have the feeling that you won't get inspiration for more questions in this category, why not submit your extra question as a single question? Reply #3. Jun 14 15, 1:24 AM |
looney_tunes
|
Most of us have submitted a quiz, full of excited anticipation, only to find that it has been returned with a message from an editor explaining why it is not yet ready to go online. When this happens, it is important to read the message carefully, and try to address all the points that are raised, not just the first one. If you aren't clear what is meant by an instruction, you should contact them by using the link at the end of the message that says "Reply to Player who Sent Note". You should definitely not just resubmit your quiz and hope for the best, as you are likely to find it returned very quickly, with a message asking you to actually make all the changes already requested. Sometimes these initial changes will be all that is needed for your quiz to go online. In other cases, the editor may have started by pointing out the most significant problems, and left some others to be taken care of once you have sorted out the first ones. When that happens, and the quiz comes back for more work, you should feel pleased that your quiz has made some progress, and is closer to going online than had previously been the case, not persecuted because the editor keeps finding something else wrong. The process of writing quizzes involves a lot of 'tricks of the trade', and every rejection note for a quiz is an opportunity for you to learn more of them. Reply #4. Jun 14 15, 12:32 PM |
tiye
|
When I claim an Author Challenge, I am asked to choose a category right after I have claimed the title. Most of the times, I haven't decided on a category at that stage, I only want the title and time to think about what I want to write. Since I need to put down a category to proceed, I usually choose General and then start moving through other categories as ideas materialize. For some reason, I don't think this is the right way to go about it. I end up with a long list of category changes in the quiz history. Is there a better way to proceed when claiming an Author Challenge? Thanks! Reply #5. Jun 15 15, 11:24 AM |
| agony
|
From our point of view, there's nothing wrong with the way you are doing it - we don't mind, and it makes no difference to the editing process. Other authors might be able to give you some hints, though, just so it's easier on you. Reply #6. Jun 15 15, 1:35 PM |
| looney_tunes
|
I don't usually claim a Challenge Title until I have spent some time thinking about how I plan to use it. This includes exploring to see if there is already anything too similar to what I have in mind, and sorting out the category where I find quizzes similar to my plan. However, when I have seen a title I simply couldn't resist, and felt compelled to grab it before someone else did, I just chose a possible spot so I could set it up and think later. Both approaches work. Reply #7. Jun 15 15, 2:11 PM |
| salami_swami
|
And if you simply wish not to have to change it so often, do what I sometimes do: keep it until general until the very end. That way, instead of changing the category constantly, you can change it once, to the exact category necessary, once all ten questions are written. I know that a quiz can morph halfway through (writing a TV quiz that turns into half a movie quiz and ending in entertainment, for instance). If you simply wish to change the quiz category less, that would be my personal recommendation from a quiz-writing perspective. :) Reply #8. Jun 15 15, 4:13 PM |
| tiye
|
Thank you, all, for your helpful advice. I just grabbed me a wonderful title which could do very well in at least half a dozen categories. Needs careful thinking! Reply #9. Jun 16 15, 4:35 AM |
| looney_tunes
|
The (very welcome) spate of quizzes generated by the Authoring Game has made me think it is time to make an addition to this thread, relating to the Submission note to editor box. All authors appreciate, and deserve, timely editing, but there are times when you particularly want it to be speedy to meet some requirement related to a game or challenge. Some authors have been including this request in the message to editors box. This is not actually a good idea - Lounge activities do not entitle you to jump the queue! As an editor, I find it feels a bit presumptuous, even when I am also a participant in the activity. Editors who are not involved, and may not even be aware of the details of the activity, probably find it more irritating, and upsetting your editor before they start is not a good idea. It is an excellent idea, however, to make it clear that the quiz is part of an activity, and what the requirements are. When an editor opens their category list of quizzes ready to be edited, they see your message in large, bold purple letters. The message is extremely visible, and won't be missed. To make it effective, your message should be concise, but include all relevant information. If you say "TRIC X", the editor may not have any idea what the requirement for TRIC X is; "TRIC X - must remain in Humanities" is enough information. The editor now knows that if it doesn't fit into that category as it stands, you would prefer to have it sent back to be reworked so as to fit instead of having it moved to a different category (which might well be done if it seems to fit nicely there). "Commission Whatever" should to be clarified to say that the title must be used as is; a specific challenge that requires the inclusion of a certain word in the title, or that it start with a certain letter, should also be spelled out. Just saying that a quiz is for "Adventures in Authoring" is not really enough, as you will be submitting a wide range of quizzes, each meeting different requirements, which should be specified each time. You do not need to inform the editors when you are using a Player Author Challenge title - the template itself contains that information. Of course, if you have been in discussion with an editor before submission, you should definitely note that you have been working with that editor - the other editors in the category will then leave it for them to continue being the person with whom you work. Reply #10. Apr 06 19, 4:33 PM |
Joepetz
|
Thanks for this clarification. For years and years now I've just been writing "TRIC X" or "Commission" or whatever the task is. If I get a quiz sent back to me, I make it habit of writing what changes I've made in the submission notebox (as you've probably seen me do, LT). Is this a good idea? I thought it made it easier for the editor to check but the way you've described the was the editor sees the note, it might be more obnoxious and tedious than helpful. Reply #11. Apr 06 19, 7:28 PM |
| JanIQ
|
If I have to rework a quiz, I would send a PM to the editor who asked for the revision(s), listing all the changes made (perhaps even a few typos we both missed on previous reviews). In the submission notebox I could then limit the comments to "previosly edited by" plus the name of the editor. Reply #12. Apr 07 19, 2:02 AM |
| looney_tunes
|
Once the editing process is underway, each editor (and author) will have a preferred approach, so I can't make any general statement. For example, whenever I send a quiz back I add a note to other editors to let them see that at a glance when it is resubmitted - there is no need for the author to put that information in their message. Not all editors do this, and if it hasn't been tagged, including the information would be useful. Authors don't know one way or the other, so it's probably useful to include it, but not essential - if another editor opens the quiz for editing, they will then see the rejection note from another editor, and will know both who edited it and what corrections were asked for. It's only a few seconds of wasted time, so not really a big deal. As for describing the changes you have made, that is entirely up to you. The editor will know what they asked for (the original rejection message is attached to the quiz template so it can be easily reviewed), and will check to see that the requested changes have been made. If you disagree on any point, or wish to discuss any of the changes, it is worth using the Respond link on the correction note to do so. (This is better than a plain PM, because the whole conversation remains attached to the quiz for the duration of the editing process, so the editor can follow the whole process as it evolves.) By the time you resubmit your quiz, you should feel confident that you have addressed the issues, and don't need to spell it out unless you wish to. By all means do if you want to - it is hard to have too much communication! Reply #13. Apr 07 19, 2:35 AM |
| agony
|
Glad you brought this up, looney_tunes, I've been meaning to address it for some time now. When thinking about what to put in the note, it would be useful to think about what editors do without consulting authors - what are we likely to do to your quiz that might actually be a problem for you? First, we move quizzes around. Easily half of submitted quizzes are not in the right category, so the first thing I do is figure out where the quiz should go, and put it there. If you don't want your quiz moved, I need to know that. If it's OK for it to be moved within the category, but not to a totally different category, I need to know that. The more specific the better, when it comes to this. Second, we fix little errors. If your quiz is just a mess, with a misspelled word every sentence, I'll send it back to you for correction. But if there are a couple of little errors here and there, most editors will fix them. So, if that weirdly spelt title, or unusual punctuation, or awkward phrasing is intentional, please put that in the note. If there is an order quizzes need to be put online, or a date they mustn't go on before, something like that, it's useful to put in the note. Preferably, though, that kind of thing would be dealt with before the quiz is submitted - if Quiz One needs to go online before Quiz Two, it would probably be better not to submit Quiz Two until Quiz One is on, just to prevent mishaps. If a quiz needs rush editing and must go online quickly, well.....it's probably better to arrange things so that that's not necessary. Not all our authors are part of authoring games, and their quizzes also deserve attention in a timely manner. Editors will arrange their time working as they think best, and sometimes that means that some quizzes might have to wait. I personally like to know if a quiz is for AinA, mostly because, since the point of the game is to improve an author's quizwriting skills, I'll go into more detail in my notes. I will probably be a little more strict, also, as part of the teaching process. Reply #14. Apr 07 19, 7:52 AM |
| agony
|
I can't seem to find time dependency addressed anywhere in these discussions, so I'd like to talk about it a little bit here. A quiz or question is time dependent if the answer could reasonably be expected to change in the foreseeable future. "Who holds the record for...." is almost certain to be time dependent. "What is the only....." is very often time dependent. If it would be useful to put words like "now" or "current" in your question, it's time dependent. The Geography category is really prone to these. Population questions are almost always time dependent, and we no longer accept basic questions about population. Questions about the main producer of a certain product, or the busiest airport, or the tallest building, or many other subjects, are very prone to time dependency. There is often a way around the problem. "Who is so and so married to?" won't work, but "Who did so and so marry in 2003?" might. You can't ask who holds the world record, but you might be able to ask who broke the previous world's record, and so on. Notice I say "might" here - you need to be careful you are not making your questions too dry and date specific. Often, though, there is a way to either reword the question, or turn it entirely around, to avoid time dependency. One solution that many authors leap to is something that we call "date stamping", and it is also not allowed. "What was the world's tallest building in 2019?" is a date stamped question. The answer will always be true, yes, but it won't always be a decent question. Date stamping leads to a couple of different issues. One is that your question will seem very stale and dated, to a player, a couple of years from now. You've all seen questions like "How many Stanley Cups had the Toronto Maple Leafs won by 2007?" and thought "That's 12 years ago, why would I know that?" The other big problem is that players will NOT think of the question as stale and dated, and will instead attach a lot of importance to the date you've given. "Hmm, what happened in the world of hockey in 2007 to make them ask about that date?" they muse. When of course, nothing in particular happened in 2007, it's just the year that someone happened to write this question. Reply #15. Jul 05 19, 6:20 PM |
15 replies. On page 1 of 1 pages. 1
Legal / Conditions of Use
|
|
: