<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<rss version="2.0">
 <channel>
	<title><![CDATA[Metareview! A contest of romance reviews]]></title>
	<link>http://metareviewer.bravejournal.com</link>
	<ttl>30</ttl>
	<description><![CDATA[    &nbsp;HEY YOU! WRITERS! READERS! REVIEWERS! SUBMIT A REVIEW!!!!!!!&nbsp;    (Reviewers are writers after all)  2/9 UPDATE!!!!ALL GENRES WELCOME   1,000 word limit.  &nbsp;  And though this part may be obvious, I'll write it anyway: you can't submit based on the fact that the reviewer liked your book or a book you loved. The review itself has to have moved you --&nbsp;not the book it's about.&nbsp;  &nbsp;  And the potential categories:  Funniest Snark  Most Moving   Worst &nbsp;(as in writing? or giving away plot? most pointless? most wandering from the subject? Heck maybe the whole contest could be based around this particular area. . .but NO.)  Most Convincing (either to read or not read a book)  Most Kowtowing/Gushing  Most Thought-Provoking  Most Unusual Format&nbsp; (for example: a&nbsp;Q and A between the reviewer and her conscience)  Please submit -- and use your own reviews and categories. I like the way AAR does contests. Organic is good. It has to be a review but it can come from a blog or formal review site.  Shortest has already been taken by Dorothy Parker, Although this site's movie reviews are great --&nbsp;Scroll down a bit and they're on the right.   Prize to be determined: But not a book. God knows the reviewer probably doesn't need a book. Although a nice&nbsp;volume of reviews from The New Yorker would be good. . maybe we need a good pretentious name too.   Update: The single&nbsp;GRAND prize will be a beautiful blank journal and pen. ]]></description>
	<generator>Bravenet Web Journal</generator>
	<item>
		<title><![CDATA[The winner!]]></title>
		<link>http://metareviewer.bravejournal.com/entry/10091/</link>
		<description><![CDATA[In my opinion, reviews are not like hard news stories -- or even editorials. The writer doesn’t hide any emotions or biases; he celebrates them. The best reviewer is open...]]></description>
		<pubDate>Fri,  4 Mar 2005 01:26:32 +0000</pubDate>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title><![CDATA[A few More RULES]]></title>
		<link>http://metareviewer.bravejournal.com/entry/9574/</link>
		<description><![CDATA[&nbsp;The blog owner will remove any entries she feels are not acceptable to a standard of reviewing* (NO ad hominem attacks will be tolerated. Even the really funny ones. We...]]></description>
		<pubDate>Mon,  7 Feb 2005 22:15:44 +0000</pubDate>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title><![CDATA[Review of Cold Comfort Farm by Stella Gibbons]]></title>
		<link>http://metareviewer.bravejournal.com/entry/9923/</link>
		<description><![CDATA[Engel Cox  posted at Amazon.com


Through the late 1900s and into the 20th century, English novelists were full of woeful tales chronicling the sad fall of gentry from...]]></description>
		<pubDate>Mon,  7 Feb 2005 13:00:00 +0000</pubDate>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title><![CDATA[HERE ARE SOME OF YOUR LONGER ENTRIES]]></title>
		<link>http://metareviewer.bravejournal.com/entry/9681/</link>
		<description><![CDATA[Most congenial "this book sucks" review:romanticafanatic writes ""Between the Sheets" by Meg BellamyTriskelion PublishingAmethyst Inferno/ contemporaryISBN#...]]></description>
		<pubDate>Mon,  7 Feb 2005 08:00:00 +0000</pubDate>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title><![CDATA[THESE are not winners. . . [just entertaining space fillers]]]></title>
		<link>http://metareviewer.bravejournal.com/entry/9579/</link>
		<description><![CDATA[Thanks to Jen Erik.  A few reviews to entertain you    some reviewers who are presumably too dead to win: 'The only consolation which we have in reflecting upon it is that it...]]></description>
		<pubDate>Mon,  7 Feb 2005 00:39:19 +0000</pubDate>
	</item>
 </channel>
</rss>
