Yes, it's that time of year again, ladies. Time to play the RITA Drinking Game.
To play this game you need only three things: some romance writer or reader buddies, a computer (to visit some romance blogs) and something to drink. Here at PBW we usually take sips of Maalox or Mylanta, but Crystal Light, Diet Dr. Pepper or designer bottled water also work (If you want to get tanked, we recommend you wait for the Stoker Drinking Game, which starts next month.)
Don't be shy about shrieking DRINK! if everyone else is busy bitching at each other. Whoever yells DRINK! first does not have to take a sip (unless they're thirsty or their tummy is starting to turn.)
The word mediocre is used at least once in the blog post (two sips if mediocre and boring are used in the same sentence.
Someone asks in comments what RITA stands for.
Someone in comments explains what RITA stands for.
Any commenter, including the author of the post, says something nasty but ends it with lol to remove the sting.
A member of RWA defends the awards.
Reference is made to how none of the nominees are bestsellers.
The scoring is questioned.
The scoring is explained.
The RITA judges are defamed.
The RITA judges are defended.
A nominee makes a sweet, semi-gushy comment on what an honor it is to be nominated (two sips if she says she doesn't expect to win.)
The name of the Golden Heart award is invoked.
The name of a popular author who is a member of RWA but didn't enter the contest is mentioned.
A list of authors who got "robbed" is offered up.
Someone mentions that e-book authors aren't permitted to enter because they don't meet the criteria.
A commenter theorizes that all of the erotica authors are now boycotting the contest.
A commenter theorizes that all of the Harlequin Blaze authors are now boycotting the contest.
What is and what isn't a romance is hotly contested.
The HEA ending is mentioned as a determining factor.
A member of RWA defends the judges while explaining the scoring and how important the award is for up and coming authors.
A non-member of RWA points out how useless the award is.
A reader states the RITA award does not influence their purchasing choices in the slightest.
Reviews of nominated books are mentioned or linked to.
The name of a former Miss America contestant/historical romance writer is invoked.
The name of a a Ph.D. student in cultural anthropology/historical romance writer is invoked.
The writing skills of past RITA winners are derided.
Someone offers up a realistic-sounding conspiracy theory involving writer org politics.
M/M romances are mentioned.
The words "popularity contest" are used in the post or in comments.
A fangirl makes a tearful protest over her object of affection, who entered the contest but was not chosen for the nom list.
The fangirl's author shows up to tearfully thank her for her words, which will inspire her to keep going on.
A reviewer states how meaningless RITA is to them (four sips if they've run at least two to four posts on their blog about the award.)
A nominee for the 2009 RITA shows up to defend the awards (four sips if she appears on more than one blog.)
Someone who actually judged the RITA books comments on the experience and how fair she tried to be.
Someone mentions how everyone's tastes differ.
One Big Gulp:
The names PBW or Lynn Viehl are referenced.
Please feel free to add your sip-taking requirements in comments.
(Originally posted on 3/08/09)