For a while now I have been meaning to write about a few other websites out there that also provide platforms to engage users in collaborative writing. I have been a user in many of them, and they all have good things and bad things (in my personal opinion of course). I will leave that for a future post, but for now I wanted to say something about one of these sites: Fabulate
This week, I was sad to hear that Fabulate is closing its doors. In Fabulate, users would submit an idea, then vote for their favorite, and finally the winning idea would move on to the next chapter, when the process is repeated. Sounds familiar? When I first heard about Fabulate, I was excited to see that my vision for Wribly was shared by other people. However, under the similarities in the surface, I realized that the implementation was very different. Let me highlight what I believe are the 3 key differences between Wribly and Fabulate:
1) Wribly imposes a structure for the creation process, i.e. each stage has rules for content and organization. This process is an adaptation of the snowflake method mentioned in a previous post. In Fabulate, users are free to write whatever comes to their mind as long as it is a continuation of the previous chapter and within the word limits.
2) The voting in Wribly uses a new method we are developing to allow a fair assessment of the quality of the work without the need of keeping in mind all the other submissions I have read. In Fabulate, as in many other websites, users would vote by assigning a number of stars, from 1 to 10, to each submission
3) Wribly is targeted for use by high school students. Fabulate is targeted to the whole web.
Fabulate’s creator and administrator, Ryan, has been nice enough to give me very good advice on how to improve Wribly as well as let me know some of the things he would have done differently on Fabulate. I am very thankful for his help, and I can’t wait to hear about his future projects!