[Melvis]

Originally Posted by Legend

Tbh I think you should be allowed to write whatever kind of feedback you want. There shouldn't be fucking rules for this section. That's just ridiculous.

That's not what I'm suggesting. The article's in the BTB Rules because many new bookers tend to read the rules to start off with, hence it's a good place to put an article which gives advice on how to give beneficial feedback; it's not a rule, though. I'm not saying there needs to be restrictions or rules on how you give feedback, but certainly people should know what's helpful and what isn't, because otherwise what's the point in giving feedback if the writer doesn't get anything out of it?

[Legend]

Isn't it just nice to know someone's actually reading your work? Honestly I wouldn't care if someone posted feedback that consisted of 'Great show!" or "That fucking sucked!"

[Melvis]

Absolutely it's nice to know people are reading. For you though, your work is already at a very high standard, there's not much to criticise, and if there is, it's usually down to personal taste (like the ECW angle, say) rather than a particular flaw. With other people, there is often considerable room for improvement, and for that, you need feedback which constructively points out those flaws so they know where there needs to be changes implemented. That's making the assumption that one wants to improve, of course.

But of course it's good to have readers, and if people enjoy it, I'm glad to hear it. My personal preference would be that they also tell me why, because then I have control over what I'm doing, rather than just... you know, getting lucky.

[heyman deciple]

Originally Posted by Legend

Isn't it just nice to know someone's actually reading your work? Honestly I wouldn't care if someone posted feedback that consisted of 'Great show!" or "That fucking sucked!"

Let's be honest Legend when has anyone ever when reviewing one of your shows said, "That fucking sucked!"

They're too busy blowing you like William Shakespere (SP) just raised from the dead and started fantasy booking on WF.

As for reviews, write them how you want.

It would be a good idea to maybe read some old reviews from more respected people to see how it's done.

Most importantly be honest don't just praise someone because your secretly hoping they'll read your shit and suck up to you.

If something is good, say so. If something wasn't your favorite say so.

The biggest favor guys like Nige and ParaNoir did for me was actually taking the time to read my stuff and giving me some constructive criticism to improve my game.

BTW LEGEND was the first guy to even review me and I always thought that was nice of him considering my fisrt show more than likely "fucking sucked" although he didn't say so. He politely told me what worked and what needed improvement. Learn from that.

And most importantly when reviewing PPV's do your best not to blow finishes. That's annoying. And don't just write Will review later, only to never return. That's possibly my biggest pet peeve. Don't be a review tease.

I'm out.

[BkB Hulk]

Originally Posted by Legend

Isn't it just nice to know someone's actually reading your work? Honestly I wouldn't care if someone posted feedback that consisted of 'Great show!" or "That fucking sucked!"

They probably didn't read if that's all they left for feedback though. That seems like review4review level stuff.

[Sykova]

Woah, I'm gonna have to take a week off and post my Monday show next week then continue from there. The holidays hit me hard and now I have a cold, I feel like I'm dying! =(

[ThatWeirdGuy]

I know this is probably a very frequently asked question, but when you're writing a show in 'recap' or 'review' form, just how detailed do you have to be? I personally prefer writing shows out in full, but I do find it very time consuming, but I know it is more helpful in getting exactly what you want across.

So when one is writing a show in full, would it be better to maybe recap the matches (ie, go in say 5 minutes in) and then write promos in full?

I know it is just a case of different people prefer different styles of writing, but I was just wondering what other people find easier?

Thanks, TWG

[heyman deciple]

Originally Posted by ThatWeirdGuy

I know this is probably a very frequently asked question, but when you're writing a show in 'recap' or 'review' form, just how detailed do you have to be? I personally prefer writing shows out in full, but I do find it very time consuming, but I know it is more helpful in getting exactly what you want across.

So when one is writing a show in full, would it be better to maybe recap the matches (ie, go in say 5 minutes in) and then write promos in full?

I know it is just a case of different people prefer different styles of writing, but I was just wondering what other people find easier?

Thanks, TWG

Here's what I use to do; Full segments. In ring promos, backstage, Announcer opening segments, brawl segments. Whatever in full. That's the stuff people really come for on a weekly TV anyway. Story progession.

As for matches, I'd do a beginning, middle, and end. It feels like a more complete experience that way but it's more or less the highlights. You know the opening moments in the match and the final sequence leading into the finish and in the middle you include signature spots or creative exchanges you think would be cool to help with the match and complete the in ring story.

[Barry_Champlain]

just an idea...has anyone done a two man BTB instead of a RAW or Smackdown doing like one thread WCW vs. WWF or something. I have no plans on doing it (due to my own BTB) but it would be an interesting idea. Each person posts a RAW and a Nitro then letting readers vote on who won the raitings.

You'd each to a PPV each month etc...

You would work out talent jumps releases etc. Could really give us an interesting thread. Would it work?

DOesn't have to be WCW vs. WWF. TNA vs. WWF or whatever.

[woofwoofwoof]

need some ideas for a scenario to start from, as interesting as possible