The Liar Writing Challenge Results + New Challenge

Share:

WEbook has reviewed all of the entries to The Liar Writing Challenge, and we are ready to announce the winners. This was a difficult challenge because it forced writers to create compelling dialogue with no character set-up, which isn't easy. Many writers revealed a commendable amount of depth and complexity to their characters in a very small space.

The entries also varied greatly in tone, which we enjoyed. Characters lied about everything from report cards to pregnancies, and it was interesting to see how each situation was handled.

When choosing the winners, we looked for lies that revealed big chunks of a person's disposition and character within the small space of an untruth.

And the winners are...

Sunday School Story by Leo1
The Taste Test by AmyMB
Naughty Mommy by leahcowden

Congratulations to the winners! You will receive a coupon code to PageToFame in your WEbook inbox shortly.

We're also going to add a new category this week, "The Reader's Choice Award." If your favorite entry didn't win, post the title and author in the comments section of this blog. In one week (7/21) we will tally the votes and award the author a PageToFame coupon. The ball's in your court, so cast a vote for your favorite entry. Go here to read through them again. 

Note: We're going on the honor system here, please do not vote for your own entry or cast multiple votes. We hope to continue this award in the future, so be honest!

****Update: SPMount won "The Reader's Choice Award" with his submission, "'Series' Liar." Congratulations SP!  

Also, Paula's last round of Writers Block has been officially cured by ReeVera, thanks so much! You can see all of Paula's videos on our YouTube Channel. Since Paula is no longer blocked, we're looking for other people with idea problems to do something fun with YouTube. Message bnaslund with any ideas!

The Next Writing Adventure:   
 
The next writing challenge is The Memory Challenge and it's ready for your submissions. For this scene, authors must write a short scene where an object evokes a strong memory for a character. We looked forward to seeing what your objects and memories are!
  
Before you head off to vote and write (or do something else, if you must) check out Leo1's winning submission.

Sunday School Story

"What did you learn at Sunday School?" I asked my grandson.

"The story of the Exodus," he answered, hanging his coat on the hall hat stand. "After Moses left Egypt, Pharoh pursued him with a great army of chariots and men."

"Yes?" I said, leading him into the study. Sharing stories was best done there. "Go on."

"Moses was trapped against the sea. Pharoh had him and The Chosen People surrounded. Things looked bad until Moses called Sixth Fleet Headquarters and Navy SEALS Command. Carrier jets bombed the Pharoh's army while a nuclear submarine landed the SEALS, who built a pontoon bridge across the Red Sea allowing the Israelites to escape."

"Are you sure that's the way the story went," I asked with one half closed, skeptical eye.

My grandson lowered his head. "Well gram-pa," he answered reluctantly, "Not exactly, but you wouldn't believe the story the teacher told us."

Comments

[Aubrie]

I love the idea of a Reader's Choice!!!

My vote goes to...
"Three Dollar Fingers" by ShanaPupik

[Finnean Nilsen]

Lost in Transmission by Lemondrop

[W N Hoover]

I too vote for Lost in Transmission by Lemondrop. I believe it should have won.

(Sorry, but I think the winning entry is a very old joke, I have heard it many times over the years. The second one was all right but I thought there were many that were better. The third one was ok too ... but well just ok.

[Complainer O'tday]

I am positive that the instructions said to use dialogue and avoid exposition (non-dialogue)... the winning pieces are FULL of chunks of exposition, and I'm afraid that for the first time since I've been doing these contests, I'm really MAD at the results...
'Adding information outside of quotations (besides who is speaking) is allowed, but not recommended. The best entries will fulfill the challenge through their characters' spoken words': is the direct quote...
I defy you to find a good story in the third place winner in particular, if you took out the exposition, since the entries are meant to be judged solely on the words spoken...
sorry, had to be at least one whiner... guess it's me this time!

[Complainer2]

I agree with Complainer.

[Complainer 3]

I also agree with Complainer and Complainer 2.

We can as well ignore all the given instructions...

[complainer 4]

Yep! I agree. This contest chose stories that included non-dialogue and one before it chose someone who entered the contest 2 times. I wonder about these stupid top writer awards. I noticed that the BEST writers on the site do not have them.

[SCLeme]

First and foremost congratulations to the winners.
Unfortunately, I too agree with the “complaints” of some unidentified members. To my mind, Webook needs to revise their own rules, or stop creating rules that apparently are solely meant to be broken, such as word limit, for in the past many authors have won challenges and didn't stick to the word limit, therefore allowing their pieces to perhaps have a greater chance of succeeding to comply with the challenges at hand.
In this case, again another rule enforced by Webook, authors were asked to try to make their piece be self-explanatory solely through direct speech. I personally revised my text a lot to comply with this rule (not to say that mine was better than the winners, of course. I simply tried to follow the rules). Unless, obviously, none of the other pieces was any better, even if they did follow the rules... (honestly, I don't think that's possible!)
That said, Leo (who won 1st place) complied with the rules, apart from the fact that, like I said in my comment on his piece, it wasn't exactly a lie, it was more of a child's' interpretation of the bible.
As for AmyMB, although the lie was completely believable, she had a lot of description. In fact, most of what made her piece unique was in the description parts. The same thing applies to Leahcowden, as far as having too much description. Had they tried a bit harder, I'm certain they would have found a way to still make it work and reduce the descriptions to a minimum.
So, here's my vote:
SSS (Sandwich Secret Service) by defno1.
In my opinion this entry complies with all the rules, the lie is perfectly clear and it's funny!
Hope it wins!

[Maggiemacabre]

I am crossed between 'Series' Liar by SPMount and 'Lost in Transmission' by Lemondrop. They tie in my book. There are also many other worthy entries. Both of these should have been winners. Both were composed of dialogue in their entirety - both were hilariously clever. Both were completely original. I write for a living, I judge by invitation across North America at all levels. I know what I am talking about. These and others I could mention, ShanaPupic for one, were far more deserving, because of dialogue and originality - and for following the rules.

But alas I can only choose one, so because of his other excellent works and contributions to WeBook I will have to vote for SPMount's entry 'Series Liar'. Now THAT shows a big chunk of disposition and character!

A not so anonymous note from me:- I would like to know who exactly at WeBook is judging these things - is it a summer intern? When you get this kind of uprising from the ranks, there is definitely something wrong. I have seen many misjudged competitions and it always makes me angry. You people have every right to stand up and express yourselves, I wish however you would have the balls to show yourselves. It would be respected more. But I do understand why you don't - and it is irrelevant anyway. What matters is the sentiment being expressed.

No doubt people will come here and say the complainers are only showing sour grapes. Well ... so they should! These results in my opinion are insulting to some of the excellent entries. The first one isn't a lie at all, it is a little joke that shows no disposition or character at all, but more, it IS indeed derived from an ancient joke. The other two - which I already can't remember and I just read them - were mediocre at best, and as many have said here, did not comply with the suggestion of the rules whatsoever. I'm sorry you three I really am, but that is my honest opinion on your subs, but congratulations anyways.

I have been on this site as a reader only just a short time and I am astounded at what goes on here in general. The attitude, the false praise which helps noone because people don't want to upset other people, the attacks on the rare people like me who are forthright ... and now THIS. My hand is over my mouth in shock.

If you are going to hold competitions, then please judge them properly, because apart from maybe the last competition, the entries of which were deserving, you are getting it wrong too often. I read somewhere that someone said you proverbially stick a pin in to decide. I feel everyone's hard work in these things can NOT be getting read by anybody who is anybody at WeBook if indeed at all. I feel that the first few subs that seem to flow well enough and perhaps read randomly are chosen as winners. Maybe I'm completely wrong, but THAT is what these results make me feel.

Bow, curtain drop.

[Liz]

My vote goes to Lying Habits by Uhuru. It did have a bit more non-dialogue description than the contest called for, but no more than some of the other winners.

[Will]

I'm not going to stick my own story in the Reader's Choice section. Don't vote for it. Cough, cough. It's the allergies.

The winner, frankly, was not good. His story is rife with grammar errors, and the plot is just not original. If I had to pick one winner out of the three, I'd choose Taste Test. It's easier to relate to.

Now on the subject of "no exposition": The winners did not have huge, huge chunks of exposition. But they did have sentences of non-dialogue. And that's fine. To make a good story, especially in 150 words, you can't have all dialogue. It's not possible. You've got to have some action so that the reader has an idea of where your story is going; otherwise, you'll be lost amongst floating heads.

Therefore, the rules just generally sucked. WeBook needs to choose better stories. That's the problem there. But at least we all wrote what we had on our mind. And if we are only writing for the sole purpose of winning a contest, then we are not writers at all.

In short: Long.

[Complainer2]

I disagree with Will. Those non-dialogue sentences were vital to the story; without those sentences, the reader wouldn't have known it was a lie. Therefore, according to WeBook requirements: 'Adding information outside of quotations (besides who is speaking) is allowed, but not recommended. The best entries will fulfill the challenge through their characters' spoken words'
I believe they have not even followed their own guidelines. Most of us edited our stories to fit in the Challenge requirements. We could have came up with better stories, if we had inserted non-dialogue sentences to describe the scene, etc. Therefore, I felt misled by WeBook's rules and reading the winning entries just made me feel cheated.

[Angel Brookins]

Like many others, I edited my stories so that you could tell the lie just by reading the dialogue (what I interpreted to be the intent of the rules, was I wrong?).
If you think you can't write a good story in pure dialogue, check out the project 'Pure Dialogue' on WeBook (parts 1 & 2) for proof to the contrary!
I am not a judge, but if I were, I would have picked Shana Pupik's 'Three Fingers' as it:
1. was an original idea, not some old joke
2. was vastly entertaining
and
3. told the story in such a way that if you only read what is inside the quotes, you still understand it fully (again, what I interpreted to be the spirit of this particular competition)

Thanks,
AngelB35

[Jesk]

Congrats to the winners, although I too agree that there where better ones out there. I don't think the winners were chosen using the guidelines that were set. I pretty much agree with everyone else here.

So here is my vote for Reader's Choice Award:
"Series Liar" by SPMount.

It's creative, orginal, strong with no exposition, (like the 'rules' asked for) well written, and the characters are fantastic! Great job SPMount, I hope you get this one!

[ShanaPupik]

I vote for "Series Liar" by SPMount because he steps UP to de plate. Yessirreebob. He need go gee his pay-de-faaaaam. He got de voice. Ain't nuboddy ellz shood win wit his woke. Ain't it 'bout shoin who de folk is? He got bling! LOL!

Thanks to all who voted for me, I do appreciate it; but also believe that SPMount is a God when it comes to writing. I guess it would be cool to beat him in this. Deserved? I don't know, but uber cool.

P.S. SP, I still say, "YOU SUCK!!" It's because you're writing is TOO good, and I'm jealous.

[Will]

I'm just going to reiterate and say: If you're writing for the rules, you're writing for the wrong reasons.

You are. End of story. I'm sorry to be rude; but you write to write. That is all.

[WEbook]

Hi Everyone,

There is certainly some validity to the comments everyone has made—two of the winning entries do rely upon non-dialogue writing to fulfill the challenge.

When making the challenges, we use our best judgment to offer recommendations that we feel will help authors complete the challenge to the best of their ability. In this case, we ended up predicting incorrectly. Some authors chose to take a risk and go against our recommendation, and it paid off for them. We should have noted in the announcement that some of the winners had submitted a type of entry we did not expect to be successful, and we apologize for not communicating that point.

We believe this problem has arisen out of our tendency to provide more guidelines and rules to these challenges, rather than less. In the future, we will offer a simple prompt and a word limit, and then give everyone the freedom to explore the possible responses for themselves. The current challenge, The Memory Challenge, accomplishes this, and you can expect more prompts such as this one moving forward.

In the meantime, keep the votes coming for the “Readers Choice Award,” and thanks again for your participation.

[ShanaPupik]

This really makes me question the expertise of the Webook staff. Anyone worth his writing weight knows that one should NOT use straight dialogue to convey a scene, so why would people supposedly trained in the writing field EVER suggest such a thing? I took this as part of the challenge parameters as did most people. I KNOW my entry could have been improved with description surrounding the dialogue.

I would like to know the qualifications of the judges. Are you published? Editors? Does anyone hold a degree related to writing? I mean, come on! Using description around dialogue is something I teach to fifth graders.

I strongly believe you should award page2fame coupons to the THREE top entries in the Reader's Choice Award because you totally screwed this one up.

As a side note, although I already cast my vote, I was thinking: I have not read every entry on here nor do I plan to. Some could say that's not fair, and they'd be right. It's not, but it all goes back to the writer's karma. Those who get their entries read and commented on are the same people who take the time to comment on other works. If you don't like your submission being ignored, become an active critiquer in the challenge.

Thanks for the opportunity to express my views. I still love Webook and appreciate what you do because I know reading this many submissions is time consuming. Although I congratulate the winners, I honestly do not feel like they represent the best of the challenge in this go around. However, the winning entries from the injury challenge were fabulous.

[SPMount]

My vote is for Lemondrop - 'Lost in Transmission'.

I want to say a few words about what's been said here too though - after sleeping on it, and then deciding not to, but then I saw WeBook's response this morning! First off … LOL @ at that; I feel it is a backtrack - although I guess it was to be expected - what else could be said after so much controversy?

The problem is NOT too many rules at all - most people after all adhered to them. The problem is the subs weren't judged by the criterion set. There were many deserving entries that met this. To suggest that the second and third 'winners' were so astoundingly brilliant that they should win over THEM, is just ridiculous. To have selected a well-known rewritten joke as the ACTUAL winner was offensive to me - as I am sure it is to anyone who strives to be completely original in EVERYTHING they write.

In connection with that and another response here, I certainly don't follow rules in MY writing in general. That is proven from my large portfolio. However, in the interest of participating in these comps (purely because I thoroughly enjoy it and not caring if I win or not) the attraction for me IN THIS PLATFORM is to BE limited by set criteria. It helps to stretch my skill, and makes me write in a way I might not otherwise choose to - such as the Liar Challenge did - where they stated that the best entries would be composed by pure dialogue.

I remember a time when WeBook could not get the kind of participation in competitions such as these challenges illicit. That is, I feel, because there is a now a prize - and that might be expected - many people cannot afford P2F – and so try to adhere to rules in the hopes of winning – or even just as unpublished authors to get that little kick of being recognised for once.

To me it is disheartening that these three should have 'won out' over that set criteria and then for the organisers to state that the reason WHY is that they, in particular, brought something extra special, is just insulting to the many that actually did go above and beyond with what they did with pure dialogue and by following the rules. Why have rules in the first place then? By that logic, I could have written about anything at all – no lie necessary – as there wasn’t in the ‘winning ‘ entry.

I do these comps purely for fun, I like to review and see other people's take on my little subs - but for many, there is more exposure here than anywhere else and perhaps might build them a little fan base for their more serious works. I see, especially young writers, grow here - learning something by following these rules - that in my book is as it should be.

The way I feel at this moment is that I am no longer inclined to participate here because; I too, don’t feel these submissions are ACTUALLY being read at WeBook – at least not properly.

[Complainer5]

To the person who commented: If you're writing for the rules, you're writing for the wrong reasons.

Here's what I think. You made a totally unnecessary, unrelated comment regarding the submissions for this Challenge. Sure, some of us write for a living. Some write for fun. Others write for recognition. BUT, let's just say that for the purpose of writing FOR this Challenge, some of us write to win, because like SPMount pointed out, a few of us can't afford P2F. So, if we wanted to win, of course we had to adhere to the rules, duh.

And to the WeBook staff who responded with:
Some authors chose to take a risk and go against our recommendation, and it paid off for them. We should have noted in the announcement that some of the winners had submitted a type of entry we did not expect to be successful, and we apologize for not communicating that point.

I'm totally speechless. It suggests that these three entries were the best among the rest. I disagree completely. I think there are far more deserving entries that MET the requirements. Therefore, I don't think it was necessary for WeBook to bend their own requirements, guidelines, rules, whatever. To say the least, like SPMount, I'm completely disheartened to participate in Challenges again because after seeing the level of these winning entries, it makes me doubt the competency of those who judge for the Challenges. The fact that one of the staff responded with "we use our best judgment to offer recommendations that we feel will help authors complete the challenge to the best of their ability" makes me completely doubt the credentials of the organizers. I was shocked. Initially, I believed they had set the rules because they wanted to make it MORE difficult for the writers, because like ShanaPupik pointed out, any writer worth their dime would know that talking heads is a no-no and it's better to include non-dialog descriptions to make the scene come alive. But after reading the 'excuse' given by the WeBook staff, I feel even more dissatisfied.

I'm sorry to appear like such a sore loser, but the fact remains - the winning entries did NOT justify WeBook bending the rules.

[Mommy_O_Four]

It's totally unfair to announce to us after the fact that the rules aren't rules at all, and these people 'chose to break the rules' and it paid off for them!
I chose to follow the rules. I assumed that anyone not following the rules would be automatically disqualified, because that is the way contests work.
What if an Olympic runner decides to leave the 'guidelines' behind, and take steroids to enhance his performance? He LOSES.
If a student 'takes a risk' and cheats off his neighbor's test, he FAILS.
Life is not about always being handed things for free, it's about earning them, and doing it within the guidelines that are presented to us.

Just my two cents.

I vote for 'Three Dollar Fingers' by Shana Pupik
thanks!

[AubrieAnne]

I agree that the 'guidelines' are the basis of the competition. Without the word count, the scenario of a person being caught in a lie, and the push to have that revealed strictly through dialogue, there is literally no competition. That's what makes the tasks challenging, a push to go beyond what we are comfortable with. Many people can write great flash fiction, but to write it within a boundry is difficult. Those who have done so should be recognized.

[l_egoiste]

I was invited to come comment here - as a person who does vote in these little competitions, I would have found this anyway. It looks to me that you have your top three winners - they are determined in these comments thus far. Strange no-oone has voted for the actual three winners ... is it not?

It does seem something fishy is afoot here - but I find that in all too many competitions. I think it should be made clear exactly who does judge these. I think if you set criterion (not necessarily the same as rules (re: that sub debate) then you better damn well judge by that same criteria and not try and justify any changes to it after the fact. I'm sorry to say it but I believe the only people that have paid attention to the entries are the entrants themselves. I admire that you are standing up for yourselves here too. Is there ever going to be a competition on WeBook not surrounded by unfairness? I have read most of the subs on these competitions and rarely do I agree with the winner. Lemondrop has been overlooked too many times and she is worthy this time for her entry. However so has SPMount - whether he says he cares or not. His entry this time not only gave two distinctly different voices, it put you in a studio audience, and told you what feel the new TV series was going to have. He let you know this and through his dialogue what kind of contestants were invited. His take on a liar detector was brilliant and comedic.

My vote is for SPMount, and Series Liar.

[Non complainer 1 LOL]

Hi guys,
I'm not the type of person that joins in any kind of internet debate whatsoever. I find them pointless. That being said, this one is about Webook's decision on the last challenge winners and since I am one of them I feel that I have a voice in the matter as well. Just so there is no question of why I personally didn't go with the flow.

I view these challenges as merely practice to improve my writing. I view most writing subjective, as I do all art forms. I didn't read the rules past the first two sentences, I didn't feel the need. It would have only been considered by me as a suggestion anyway.

Am I surprised that I won, sure. Am I happy that someone recognized my work, sure.

But I'm more surprised by the bitter outpour on this site. I didn't expect to see my name when I logged in today, but even more, I didn't expect to read all that was below it.

So incase any of the other winners are reading this and feel like they weren't deserving. Truely...I commend you!! The rule breakers or whoever you are!!

LOL, about the things people argue about to other people they don't know over the internet. A first for me.
Peace,
leahcowden

Oh and to the WEBook staff, I really like the new rules....no rules policy, I think I can abide by those;)lol

[Maggiemacabre]

So that's alright then Leah isn't it. You don't respect the rules so that makes everybody else who does, bitter? They have no right to complain? I'm happy for you that, that is so amusing to you. But by your admission, as an accidental winner, it must be.

However, as much as I can see you don't care, together with your message and the the way you signed it, you just helped everyone else's point here. You didn't, as Webook state, bring something different deliberately after all - go that extraordinary length to be so different. It wasn't intended. You didn't read the rules and just wrote what you wanted for your own purposes - which is all well and good- don't get me wrong - but my ... I really think the judge of this should be very red-faced - NOW especially.

Again don't get me wrong, this isn't yours or any of the other winners faults at all, noone has suggested that, it is about how the criteria was ignored in the judging, but I don't think you should be so cavalier about it, whether it is amusing to you or not, when so many who do take these competitions very seriously are obviously very upset about it.

As far as your last comment goes, you jumped the gun on the no rules policy, fortunate for you that the pin landed on your submission.

PS: internet debates are hardly pointless ... what a general statement. You will find that many people here know each other, its called belonging to a club whether it is face to face or not, and when that club has rules and regulations, how else do you propose we discuss issues as they arise? Book the conference room at the Savoy and we'll all fly in? I can only assume that like your submission, you don't know the 'rules' of modern living either.