Weekly Contest Discussion

Hello, ladies and gentlemen of Poems & Quotes! (Also children, jesters, wenches and bums, and other sorts of hardworking folks who are not restricted to the gentry)

This thread is a place to talk about the system for controlling who is eligible for being an esteemed winner of the Weekly Front Page Poem Contest Extraordinaire.

Right now, winning slots are open to everybody. We mods have been mulling over the idea of restricting wins from a poet to once per month. Jane or Britt or Joe or Sher or Ann will have to clarify this point, because I'm not sure if months are determined by actual months, or by 4 week stretches. But in either case this would mean that a single poet would be eligible to win no more than 12 times per year.

Some concerns have been raised about this idea, in the worry that the best-of-the-best poems might not be getting the recognition they deserve, if their spots are going to another poem, since the former poet already won in this month. I think this is a valid concern, and I'd like to hear people speak up about it if I've missed or misquoted and aspect of their argument.

The counterargument of the "once-a-month" side is that part of the function of the front-page poems should be to showcase a variety of the site's poets, as well as quality poems. In the past there have been issues with the same people winning or getting nominated every week. This is probably natural, as everyone has their favorites, but I think that's why the judges tend to get switched out over time. By putting a monthly limit on winning, we'd be trying to ensure than different poets win every week, and hopefully that would foster more exposure for less well-known poets in the arena. The front-page poems may officially be meant as reads for internet surfers non-commitedly glancing over the site. Really, though, the prestige of the contest is for those of us already mucking about here. I'm confident that we should be able to find 3 poems worthy of front-page status, even if they can't win every week.

We've also been talking over consistently adding an Honourable Mention aspect to the contest. If, for example, there's a really stellar, fan-freaking-tastic poem that can't win because they already won two weeks ago, that poem might be chosen for honourable mention. That way, it gets some respect, while still leaving the 3 slots open for fresh faces. What are your thoughts on that?

Theoretically we could still get only 4 people winning month after month, but I doubt that. There are hundreds of thousands of people on the site, thousands of whom are active, hundreds of whom must write poems worthy of recognition. Rather than worrying too much that our favorite poets might not win every week (because they get their spotlight, don't worry) I would encourage us all, as a body of members, to work a little harder in our poem reading. Delve a little deeper into the corners of the Nature section, the Inspirational section, the Dark/Horror section. There are tons of people writing that don't get a fraction of the comments of the more well-known poets. Maybe with a little encouragement and literary advice, some of these n00bs and poem hermits will get all the sparkling, neon glory of the front page, mm? Additionally, there are about 50 new member who are activated every day. You can find them in the member search, sorted by registration date. Remember how it felt to get your first shining red poem comment notification EVER? Give 'em some love, folks.

As Britt has a for mentioned, it is on a monthly basis (usually spanning 4 weeks, sometimes more).

How would it be more? Would it be like someone who won the first week of October, and the last of November?

Indeed, as Britt just mentioned, it can be the other way to, but a back-to-back win usually isn't what we look for on the weekly contest (nor do others smile upon it, usually they frown and say hey that's not fair...)

There you go Dee

http://www.poems-and-quotes.com/discussion/list.html?topic_id=1453

>you can make a thread and ask for comments , umm critique, short...long..sweet.
All you like.

Dee - we are talking about the main contest on the site (the winners you see when you first login) which are chosen/voted on from the senior members of the site.

There have indeed been workshops done before on the site in the 'request' forum. Not sure if there are any currently going on, but it's worth a look.

Moderators have the final say in what is put on the main page, but the senior members of the site pick the poems by voting (they only are allowed to vote for 3 poems a week). So in the end, we (mods) try our best (based on the selected poems) to have the winners be 'outstanding effort' and beautiful poetry.

I think only being allowed one win per month is fine, I thought there was already something like that in place actually lol As a general rule I have been trying to browse through people I don't know for nominating to see some fresh work. Amazing some of the little gems you can come across.

^That's great! And it's exactly what I'd encourage people to do.

I'd in no way want to pass over great poetry for "substandard" poetry. I guess what I'm suggesting is that placing a loose cap on the number of times you can win per month will push us to discover a wider variety of excellent poems. I'd like to put some faith into what the site can produce. I think the few cases where a great poem might be passed over is addressed by the addition of an honourable mention.

I mean yes, there are a couple of authors on here that I think produce win-level poetry pretty much every time they put their fingers to the keyboard. But I would rather make the push to find a greater number of deserving poets, and bring them into the spotlight for a bit, than see my favs win every time. I don't think it lessens the calibre of poetry being exposed. That would only be the case if you think the few who gt nominated every repeating week are the ONLY ones writing excellent poetry.

On the unrelated note, I think the workshop idea is great. I know we've talked about it some, but maybe we could start something up where the work is being done in a thread, rather than a comment exchange?

Oo! And what if we were to start up a Life of a Poet type thread cycle, but highlighting a different site poet and a couple of their poems per week? We've done things like this (threads where you list your favorite site writers) but maybe something like this would allow for more in-depth discussion, and bring fresh faces into the light.

I think winning once a month is fine. There really, as already said, is a lot of poems that should get nominated and then win. I think it impossible that the same person would be able to win twice in a row or even once a month unless this poet is just outstanding and like freckin fanatically awesome, which I think most likely not.

Anyway I like the idea of the Life of a Poet thing. It would get more people to talk in the poetry discussion forum and thus increase activity there.

"I think winning once a week is fine."

You wanna win once a week, Jad? Haha, you cheeky wolf man.

Excuse my illiterateness to pre-read my work before submitting it. :P

I'm not with restricting members wins to once per month. I think a poem should be judged as a poem, the author name/identity put aside as if it's not there. as if it's by anonymous.

actually the name of the contest itself is ''The winners of our weekly poetry contest'' not the ''A variety of the site's talented poets''. I don't think in any contest a poet would be restricted to a certain amount of winning every certain period of time.

I'm all with having new talents on the front page, but not on the expense of other more deserving poems. I'd rather actually read a unique and original poem than a new name to be honest.

----

''Moderators have the final say in what is put on the main page, but the senior members of the site pick the poems by voting (they only are allowed to vote for 3 poems a week). So in the end, we (mods) try our best (based on the selected poems) to have the winners be 'outstanding effort' and beautiful poetry.''

I'm sorry, but maybe I'm getting this wrong. do you mean that you guys are the judges? I though there was a committee of judges of members not mods?

So you guys just moderate the wins to make sure everything is in balance?

I understand what you mean, Britt, but the way I see it, sometimes a member would write two outstanding poems in a short period back to back and then won't write as well for a long time. or would have a block. and sometimes they would write a more outstanding one, lets say a week after their last win. Is it fair then to not let their work win because another one of their poems, even if lesser in quality then their latest one, has already won a week or two ago?

I don't find it fair to not let a member win because they just wrote two works worthy of winning back to back or in a short period of time. quite the contrary actually, I find they deserve all the recognition. If you can keep your spotlight time after time then you are worthy of winning even every week in every year. it's not that easy and something that is to be encouraged. not to mention that it would make the competition more fun and, in my own point of view, more fair.

If you trust the impartially of your judges then there is no problem at all why a poet would not win countless times if they deserve it. after all it's more of the work that wins not to the poet since you don't judge the work on their name but on the quality of it.

To take another angle, what do you guys think we could all do to guard against the same person winning every week? I clearly remember there being concerns when it felt like the same people kept winning again and again. Folks were worried that only the judges friends were being voted for, etc. Allowing for natural human bias which happens despite our best intentions, what sorts of ways could we guard against that? Maybe there are some solutions that wouldn't require an official rule.

As an aside, I'd hope that the very good poets on this site are getting recognition and feedback, regardless of whether they win or not. Yes? No? Hopefully?

Sibyllene, If it's a fair win then I have no problem, as I said with the person winning countless times. it all however depends on whether or not the judges are fair and how many judges are there, because If even one of them is bias that won't make a non deserving poem win, would it? there has to be at least two or three judges who aren't fair and all favoring a the same person. I don't think that you guys would pick three judges wrongly and it would happen that they all would favor the same person, would you? or even if you did you won't notice it instantly?

anyway I'm all with openness. I think the names and identities of the judges should be out in the open along with reason why they picked the winning poems. or maybe like Abby's contest they would send their thoughts about the nominated work or at least the ones worthy of a win to a mod and a mod would post it in the weekly congratulation thread. if a member sees that a certain poem deserved a win from their point of view then they could bring it up and say how they felt about the poem and why, I see no problem with it.

Great!

"Which is also why we have been trying to encourage senior members to check out especially the new members of the site and comment on their poetry, get their name out there. It's hard to find someone who writes amazing poetry if you can't find them on the boards or in comments somewhere."

Absolutely. I think clubbies nominating clubbies might just be the nature of the beast. As much as we all try to be impartial when it comes to quality, clubs tend to be made up of members who gravitate together over shared tastes in poetry. I don't think this is a bad thing... just what happens. So long as people don't nominate people only because they are their friends, which I don't see happening.

By the way, the mods aren't trying to force something on you members - we're bringing this up for discussion so we can see what you think! We're just looking for a way to keep things fair, and I'm glad you guys have been chiming in with your opinions on how to do that. Anyone else out there who has something to add, or even an opposite opinion?

In a former life as a judge, we were never told about any rule of winning once per month or at least I don't remember being told. We did, however, try to apply that to the choices to showcase lesser known writers. Unfortunately, due to the lack of nominations, that was not an easy task to accomplish. Personally, I think the best poems should win each week regardless of when the writer last won. This whole situation reminds me of discussions of giving an entire team a ribbon, award, etc., just so everyone is a winner. Losing at something is a part of life and a lesson everyone has to learn sometime, hopefully before they reach adulthood. No matter what process is used, the once a month rule or any other that might be reached, there will always be site members that think it is unfair and biased. You cannot please everyone all the time.

Not sure this is the right forum but there is one thing that I find annoying about the Contest Nominations page. Poems can drop out of sight as others are nominated. This means that some poems may never be seen by the judges or other site members to add their nominations and comments. I know the answer before I ask this question but why can't there be some type of continuation of that page, like a page two or three or four if needed.

See I am physic, I said I knew the answer, lol

^
I agree we need more than 1 page, or at least allow it to scroll automatically. It's on our Janis list, sadly :(

Maybe somebody could be in charge of taking a list of the nominated poems from time to time? I didn't even realize that was happening.

Ah, yes. Hrm.

In an unrelated note - is there a way to tell if someone is in a club without checking the club member lists?

And some of the best poems do get "knocked off" from time to time and Britt is right, cannot be voted on.

^
In an unrelated note - is there a way to tell if someone is in a club without checking the club member lists?

How about an extra line in the profile? When someone joins a club, the club name appears there or something to indicate club membership.

Are you saying that as an idea, or as in something that actually exists and I just can't find it anywhere? Heh!

''How about an extra line in the profile? When someone joins a club, the club name appears there or something to indicate club membership.''

that wound be a great idea! but I think would require Janis as well. how about club mangers asking all club members to add to their profile that they are a member of (name of the club). for now at least? and having it as a rule that if you're a member of a certain club you must mention it in your profile.

----

I was actually wondering if most members agreed that there should not be any restrictions on members winning the weekly contest would such rule be removed?

"I was actually wondering if most members agreed that there should not be any restrictions on members winning the weekly contest would such rule be removed?"

Not to speak for everyone, but that's my hunch. There are pros and cons to both options, so it's just up to what people want, I think. I'd like to keep discussion open for a while longer, though, and give everyone a chance to talk.

'how about club mangers asking all club members to add to their profile that they are a member of (name of the club). for now at least? and having it as a rule that if you're a member of a certain club you must mention it in your profile.'

I don't think it should have to be a rule, but I like the idea of that being encouraged, if individual clubs/people want to. I know RTVW members tend to build their club into their actual names, as a form of identification. A profile shoutout would make some things easier, as long as it wouldn't be a source of... poetry-site prejudice?

To be completely honest, I'd have to say it's up in the air for me. If you limited it to winning once per month for each poet, that may show some new faces - however, allowing this may limit the quality of the poems...but regardless, I would think the judges would make the best decision as to who would win. If you took away all rules, meaning anyone could win at any time - that of course rises the issue of which several people have complained about with people winning once every week or two. I don't know, I personally like variety, new faces, and not the same ones all the time. I don't see anything wrong with the contest right now, it's been nice to see new faces, and the poetry isn't all that bad either. It's nice to see some people get recognized who may never have been before.

''I don't think it should have to be a rule, but I like the idea of that being encouraged, if individual clubs/people want to.''

the reason I suggested it being rule is to make everyone post it, hence you won't wonder who's were or should you invite a member to your club or are they already in a club and such. it would make things easier and more clear.

----

''Nor can you maybe ask RTVW to come chime in since you're online? That would be great :)''

Done, Britt!

Not penalizing no. more like how it was to be with the DCM.

So just kind of encouraged, rather than penalizible? (I know that's not a real word). I'd just like to avoid making superfluous rules if they can just be enforced socially.

By prejudice, I meant someone going "Oh man, that person is in Page by Page, they all hate haiku. Haiku are obviously the only poems worth writing. I now hate that person with the fury of a million suns."

On a lesser scale. But that shouldn't be happening anyway, I suppose.

I have different opinion..regarding this.
I know about the need of wanting to see new faces which we already saw in the past several contests..

but still I think when a poem REallly deserves to win, like REALLY excellent enough..that rule should be ignored since there would be another 2 places left.. I mean incase the poet already won from a week or two.

There must be at least special cases, that the judges or the mods may or would agree over after checking the piece written

"that rule should be ignored since there would be another 2 places left.. "

That's good point. It's unlikely that ALL the slots would be filled by members who won previously.

If we were to go ahead and get rid of this monthly rule, what do you guys think should be done with those Honourable Mentions? Should we keep them on, just for giggles?

I think I missed some stuff but I am read up and I will agree with having people post their club on their profile as it would give us an indication of who is in what club without going through all the trouble of looking all of it up. :]

Also, Like I said, once a month is a good way to do it but I am not saying that there are poets who deserve to win several times because of the poetic talent of their poem, But you always have those who will argue and get mad at someone winning several weeks in a row.

^
If we were to go ahead and get rid of this monthly rule, what do you guys think should be done with those Honourable Mentions? Should we keep them on, just for giggles?

I think they should be kept. There are some weeks when there are one or two that don't win, that are worthy to be given attention and the Honorable Mention is a good way to do that.

You could keep the honorable mention for maybe if there is a poet who won a time before also but he just didn't make the cut like the one who got nominated.

That's good point. It's unlikely that ALL the slots would be filled by members who won previously.

now this made me giggle you know cause
^^I doubt I meant that.

Yes, encouraged it is. I don't see why members of a clubs won't post it on their profiles after being asked by managers anyway.

I don't like the idea of ''special cases'' though. I think the rule should either be removed as a whole or kept as a whole. it would be less confusing this way.

as to the honorable mentions, by all means keep them!

"I don't like the idea of ''special cases'' cases though. I think the rule should either be removed as a whole or kept as a whole"

Well, but what does it hurt, in this case? If it's a set rule, then yeah, but if it's merely encouraged and abby is embarrassed to be associated with The Club, maybe we could let her hide? I'm open to be convinced on this, I just don't want to be too much of an authoritarian. I don't currently foresee anyone putting up a fuss about it, but eh.... you never know what people will fuss about. I guess we'll see.

^
I don't like the idea of ''special cases'' though. I think the rule should either be removed as a whole or kept as a whole. it would be less confusing this way.

Well, there would inevitably be times it would be useful and also times is would not be useful so special cases seems more easy rather then dismissing it or allowing full usage of that ability. Just my thought.