The critique process was usually different, but always in a small group. Each person would read our drafts and then everyone would give them critique on how to make the story better. It felt useful, but at the same time useless to have my story critiqued so many times. When I got some new critique I was happy and would consider it for some time before actually adding it to my story. But sometimes I would get the same feedback, even if I had changed it. It was sort of repetitive. The 3rd draft critique protocol was pretty simple, someone would facilitate, someone would read their story, people would ask questions, then we would discuss the story, the writer would respond to the feedback, and then the facilitator would debrief on what had just happened. It was a simple process and very useful critique.