The Waiting Game
Waiting is the worst part of any writing you do, whether it’s the Bar Exam or your submissions spreadsheet. We know it; we’re writers too. So as we tried on this new competition format, you bet there was a lot of behind-the-scenes debate about whether to make everyone wait for the final results, or let the folks who didn’t advance to the shortlist know early so they could let their fingernails regrow, set their feedback aside for a week or two, and be ready to give the final winners an unqualified pat on the back. Since you’re reading this post, it’s obvious what we decided: most of us felt pretty strongly that we’d like to at least know that we didn’t have to wait, even if that meant we hadn’t won.
Shortlisted writers: this is your reminder to not discuss which story is yours, since it’s already in the hands of our judges.
Everyone: this is your reminder that content warnings might be optional, but they’re kindnesses that you can do which will save you trouble in the long run. Especially in this year, with its undending news cycles of grief and loss and violence, adding a content warning to works with those themes will ensure that people are prepared to engage with them and with your work before they sit down to it. You’re not scored on your content warning, of course, and our judges are professional teachers and writers and editors – but they’re also human beings, and no matter who you are, it’s a lot easier to read a story thoroughly and conscientiously if you don’t get blindsided in the middle of it. (If this doesn’t make sense to you, try to imagine being asked if a story in a genre you really don’t enjoy is “good.” It’s hard, right?) We had more than one judge mention that they had gone back to read a story (or two or three) later to ensure that they’d been as engaged with it as they were with the rest of the group’s stories.
Well, as I tell the judges… anything that went right is entirely due to our admin team’s untiring work behind the scenes, and anything you hate is probably my fault. Unless it’s your feedback—hating and loving your feedback is just kind of part of being a writer.
With no further ado, then, let’s check out who’s still in the competition:
Congratulations to Our Shortlist
Let’s have a hand for the following writers, who advanced to the next judging round of the Super Challenge:
Amy Manson
Crystal Cook
Sharon Kretschmer
Yeshasvi Mahadev
Jen Mierisch
Lin Morris
Chrissie Rohrman
RC Nath
Johannah Simon
Stef Smulders
Shelby Van Pelt
Paige Vest
Wait, wait, there’s more!
Writers, if you don’t have your feedback, please send us an email at superchallenge@yeahwrite.me, ’cause that email should have reached you about twelve hours ago.
Now that this round of the competition is over, the shortlist will be re-read (and scored afresh, to ensure that if you got a judge or two who consistently scores low in the first round, it doesn’t affect your ultimate result). A second round of feedback will be emailed to shortlisted writers on Wednesday, December 23, and the winners will be announced around 3pm on Monday, December 28.
About the author:
Rowan submitted exactly one piece of microfiction to YeahWrite before being consumed by the editorial darkside. She spent some time working hard as our Submissions Editor before becoming YeahWrite’s Managing Editor in 2016. She was a BlogHer Voice of the Year in 2017 for her work on intersectional feminism, but she suggests you find and follow WOC instead. In real life she’s been at various times an attorney, aerialist, professional knitter, artist, graphic designer (yes, they’re different things), editor, secretary, tailor, and martial artist. It bothers her vaguely that the preceding list isn’t alphabetized, but the Oxford comma makes up for it. She lives in Portlandia with a menagerie which includes at least one other human. She tells lies at textwall and uncomfortable truths at CrossKnit.
