Boblishman wrote:
... and then re-submitting a month later, and the improvement being judged really appeals to me as a writer ...
The high quality of judgmental decisions demonstrated in the RAD contest is itself more important than the entries.
I say that perhaps, with too much emphasis. But i like the point it makes. It refers to the potential implied by Bob's comment – his reference to the ongoing critique.
The successive series of critiques Bob suggests causes the RAD to focus upon its pedagogical potential. As a tool for developing everyone's writing skills, not casually but purposefully, this new jury panel becomes the new super teaching tool.
Ametist points out the jurors' focus upon development of each entry (as opposed to comparing entires). This should encourage us noob's to enter along with the pros. If the jury panel were formalized as a permanent feature of the GoW – institutionalized, as it were -- it would do more than all other efforts to promote age writing.
Of course, in saying this i realize that it is a huge demand upon those who participate as jurors – no; who give of themselves as jurors. And this pool of talents is limited. But by formalizing a contest method of criticism, it would help prepare others for the task.
Truly, i can think of no better way to encourage age production. Getting free criticism is its own reward for those of us who are just starting age writing. We don't mind you giving the pros their $50,000 contest winner checks; but for us, learning and experience is the name of the game.
