The Presidential Election Review Challenge

B

Blue

Technological Romance
Now that it's settled which Presidential Candidates have what amount of stylistic and technical knowledge, it's time to figure out who is the best at describing stuff in a way people think is cool, funny, interesting or otherwise engaging. Hence, the Review Challenge.

Candidates are to submit a text-based review of anything they wish (as long as it fits within the Forum Rules and Article II.D.1 of the Charter). It can include pictures and whatever kind of clever formatting, but must be longer than 1500 words. The recommended subjects of a review would be a book, movie or video game. The reviews are due in two weeks (August 15th), and the Reveiws will be judged by the following metric:

  • a. Creativity (Literary expressiveness or emotional inflection in the review as to how likable it is)
    b. Quality (Metric of communicative ability, logic and vocal effectiveness)
    c. Interestingness (How engaging the review is)
    d. Readability (Spelling and grammatical correctness)

 
I really should have paid more attention to the charter before I agreed to participate in this election.

I mean, at least two of those judging criteria are entirely subjective. For example (were I a judge), I am so disinclined towards certain subjects, say football, or ponies, or German theatre, that no review, no matter how it is written, is capable of making me find anything about them "likable" or "engaging."

How are we supposed to deal with that?

Grozit, maybe I'll just review MYSELF. That'll show 'em. "Doom Shepherd: How He Got To Be So Awesome."
icon_twisted.gif.4b4ae1ef701771220406944a95288a3d.gif


 
I am considering and reconsidering the other challenges.

My current stance on the issue is "Hmmmm." until I can see a few more opinions on the matter.

 
So is this one still going, or on hold pending review? I don't have a lot of time I can budget to writing, so I need to know before I start.

 
Yah. Of course, I've been known to debate on the side of positions contrary to my own, JUST to prove a point.

Not that I plan on doing so... no... I simply pl;an on making Goebbels look like an amateur. Bwa-ha-ha.

So, who goes first, that I may sink my fangs deeply into their poor unsuspecting throat?

 
I've been know for arguing a point or two in my day. I have to warn you though, I'm not afraid to use this

5458101802_e3bd66cf43.jpg


 
Hopefully the debate will not be one centered around anything religious, I don't think I can stand another "debate" like that.

sigh
Click to expand...
I hear ya...
Click to expand...
Don't worry. I doubt ABG will be good at debating; he's far too predictable already.

"NO U"

"nope.avi"

"*Pony image* YOUR ARGUMENT IS INVALID, SON."

He does it all the time (mainly the former two) in Steam chat...
Click to expand...
"NO U" is not something I say all the time, same with "your argument is invalid" and I traditionally use "nope.avi" when something you claim is actually incorrect (so I guess all the time yeah
icon_razz.gif.bc231d040278f212a9252a552e59c566.gif
). And considering you've never actually debated something with me before, I think your prediction about my ability is premature.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top