The 2016/2017 Anthology has been put on hold!
After much discussion, we have decided to forego the 2016/2017 UKA anthology and produce a spanking new 2017/2018 first WABD anthology next year instead.
This is partly to do with the lack of votes (thanks to those who have voted thus far! Your votes will be carried over to next year) and, frankly, content, but also because of the WABD launch and the archiving of UKA.
Both these projects (WABD and the anthology) are proving to be huge amounts of work, so we've deemed it best to concentrate on the transition from UKA to WABD for the time being, leaving us to work on a spectacular 'First WABD' anthology next year.
You'll be kept updated, of course!
I've not been able to vote because I don't have the appropriate software available on my computer. That's why I couldn't vote last year either.
What do you mean by "frankly, lack of content"?... Are you saying that this year's nominations were a bit crap?
No Archie. The real reason is that the prose writers were aggrieved that there were too many poetry nominations and not enough prose. See the arguments on the forum on UKA.
Ah, yes. I've read it now. Well, Luigi, to a large extent I agree with you. I think it would be a shame to miss out the anthology for a year. I don't think it's right to deny publication to the poets just because there isn't enough prose being nominated or even - perhaps - written. Maybe the prose writers should just write more, or the site should try to attract more prose writers. Either way, it's not the poets' fault.
Then again, as Andrea says, it's a bit of a toil to work on an anthology and a new site at the same time. I don't know. I'm not going to lose too much sleep over it anyway.
What do you mean by "frankly, lack of content"?... Are you saying that this year's nominations were a bit crap? - Arch
Not at all 🙂 And it is also not quite correct to say that the prose writers were aggrieved that there was more poetry. In fact, it is grossly unfair to say that is the 'real reason'. It isn't at all. We had some great poetry AND prose noms. But the nominations overall (prose and poetry!) were a bit sparse (maybe people forgot to press the button?) and therefore, all things considered, we decided to concentrate on the UKA transition so that we could give our full attention to the anthology next year.
By the way, the nominations button has now been reactivated, so please do make use of it if a piece (prose OR poetry:)) takes your fancy...
No, Andrea, you are quite right: it was only ONE author who was aggrieved about the lack of prose nomination and he's now glad that the 'right decision' (his words) was taken. I, like Archie, won't be losing any sleep.
The workload that Richard and Andrea have running UKA, archiving it and setting up WABD, must be huge.
Let's not forget that when demanding outlets for publication. Everything will come together nicely and next year their will be an anthology, probably a bumper one too if you think about it. Seems very reasonable to me.
Thank you, Jay. You are right, it IS a lot of work and, unfortunately, and unlike Arch and Luigi, I HAVE been losing sleep over it 🙂
It's not worth losing sleep over Andrea. I can understand that people expect what they are used to but when significant changes happen like a migration to a completely new site with a new look and a new system to learn and understand as well as marrying the two together, I think its more than reasonable to accept that also expecting a book to be compiled and edited after votes have been counted, then printed and published is asking far, far too much.
2016 is about the changes, 2017 and beyond can be about the anthologies and the good times.
Its a big change that sadly (I mean that) needs to happen given the internet today. It'll keep the site modern and relevant and more importantly, discoverable at all on Google et al with their new rules about trawling the web and deciding what is relevant. Without evolution you have extinction and its a sad fact of the modern world that websites that don't change, die.
UKAuthors deserves its place amongst the writing sites of the world, I still love the place despite being a bad user over the last four or five years, but now I'm back and have killed my blog to concentrate on what I love best and that is writing fiction and poetry; so we will all deal with it in our own way and get on with the task of what its all really about and that is showcasing our writing. Who cares what it looks and feels like, as long as we have an outlet and the words we write can be read.
Now get some sleep and stop worrying, people won't mind once they understand the reasons why. Without you and Richard we'd have no WABD and no UKA either. What either of them looks or feels like is irrelevant. Your efforts give us such an easy outlet to be creative. I, for one, appreciate that.
I confess I totally forgot to vote and that is not like me. I can fully understand that getting the new site off to the flying start it has...must have been a huge headache. It really is working well and sorry for forgetting. If I remember rightly last time you had to keep reminding folk but it should not be necessary.
It's a great thing to be included in the anthologyI am mortified!
Thanks Jay and Alison - we do really greatly appreciate your support.
And don't worry about the voting Alison - you've now got another year to do it in 🙂
I agree with much; most; perhaps all that J 12 said and now somewhat reluctantly accept the need for change. However there is I think an inherent weakness in the selection process for the Anthology. In my view that is Nomination. I suspect that many more submissions than those nominated are worthy of inclusion, or at least consideration, but are not selected because they were not nominated. Having said that I am sorry to say that I can't offer a solution, only vague suggestions. Perhaps a way might be found to augment nominations. Back in UKA days the Nib might have been a good starting place. I wonder too if the nomination system has the disadvantage that in the first half of the year people might hold back thinking that something better might came along later in the cycle. By this time of course many of us will have forgotten the good stuff that they left behind.
Finally I endorse the comment that we should all recognise the work that Andrea and Richard put in to keep what I guess most of us regard as 'our' site, going.
Regards to everyone, Michael (AKA Kipper)
quote "I suspect that many more submissions than those nominated are worthy of inclusion, or at least consideration, but are not selected because they were not nominated."
As far as I am aware, nominating a poem or piece of writing is open to everyone. So, if you feel a poem should be nominated, then nominate it.
Nothing is infallable and nibs too, although anonymous are simply one nibber's opinion. Some of my poems with the most reads are not nibbed or nominated. I am sure others find the same. 😉
I feel the nominations are as fair as can be. Someone may love a poem and nominate it but it is the community as a whole who votes and decides which ones make the anthology. I used to always say if I nominated a poem, as I wanted to show my appreciation but that can cause friction too so now I sometimes say and sometimes don't. I steer away from the potential of the urge to reciprocate through trying to be appreciative. That does make things difficult.
Many are nominated but only get through at the end of the day by everyone voting so it is a very fair system. Also, to hold off in case something better comes along serves nobody. Yes, if there are many to choose from, it can be a daunting task for voters but for myself, if i consider a poem worthy of nomination, it is because it appealed or moved me is some way that will be remembered. Hope that helps.
Kipper says: 'Back in UKA days the Nib might have been a good starting place.' But that has almost exactly the same status as a nomination – it is a vote of approval from one (unnamed) individual. I think perhaps a better way to increase the 'field' (which I think we need to do in prose) might be to allow authors to suggest which of their own stories they would like to put forward for consideration. Then those members of the community who are interested could take a second look at the authors' own suggestions and see if they want to nominate any of them. It wouldn't be 'self-nomination' but simply a way for authors to draw attention to stories that they think may have been overlooked. We could do it here on this forum.