Weekly Contest Thanks and Review

This is my last comment in response to Sherry Lynn

Enough, already. You all have had several warnings and this is the final one.

^^^

I've never had a warning in the whole 6 years that I know of...

Okay okay... I'll be a law abiding citizen.

---- Shhhhhh, lostlove.

Lostlove,

I meant for the thread itself. I am not accusing you as you individually. I mean you as in everyone.

About judges winning- I know there used to be a bunch of different rules about running the weekly contest, but they haven't been in place for some time now. Nowadays, I think the basic idea that we go off of is the conclusion that was drawn in a big site-wide discussion last year. That is: any poem should be eligible to win, and each poem should be judged on its individual merit and nothing else. Thus, we get things like...

1. Judge's poems can win (though it may be trickier for them to win, since they can't vote for themselves)
2. Poets who had a win earlier in the month, or even the week before, can win.

I'm not sure if the SAME poem can win twice. I don't think so, but I'd have to double check. But anyway, that is the philosophy behind the process these days.

Thank you for answering...Sherry Lynn

Well if you think of it,

Between the 5 judges, there are 105 points,
with that being said, a poem written by a judge has less chances to win because they can't vote for it

and as for the same poem wining twice in a raw, while a wining poem can show up in the nomination page, It can't win twice, nope <3

Thanks Rab. That's what I was thinking, but I wasn't positive.

Thanks, Rab, for the breakdown.

Just thought, if a winning poem is reposted can it win again? Say if a poet deleted it and reposted it at a later date?

Theoretically, a deleted & reposted poem could win again. However, the "WIN" icon would not be attached to the original post, since it was deleted, and would not attach to the new post, since the 'site' perceives it as a new poem.
If it were to win again it would have to be in spite of numerous members' PMs to the mods alerting us to the fact.

<3 guys

I don't think a wining poem can win again under any circumstance my friend

The only case in which deleting a poem to resubmit it again would be fine, is if the poem hasn't got any nominations and you want it to be noticed, therefor nominated and for it to have a fair chance of wining the weekly <3

I think I'd have a problem with that, actually. I wouldn't go back to an old poem from 2010 and resubmit it in the hopes of getting a win or some nominations. The point of "Weekly" winners is that they are new writes. The only time I think resubmitting like that would be fine would be if it was an edit or re-work of an older poem - one that was different enough to warrant a new spot. In which case you'd probably keep the old poem, too.

I was a judge back in 2008 and judges were allowed to win. I remember Sylvia and Valedico winning. The main rule that Bob had was that judges weren't allowed to vote for their own club members. Which is ridiculous. The whole judges' forum thing was ridiculous.

I want to know further details about what Hellon said about me in my Abalone days.

I don't see an issue with bringing up the past as long as it isn't being used as a weapon to attack someone personally in the PnQ present. The past is most interesting and makes up about 99.9999 per cent of who we are.

Donna be afear'd, me hearties.

I don't see an issue with bringing up the past as long as it isn't being used as a weapon to attack someone personally in the PnQ present. The past is most interesting and makes up about 99.9999 per cent of who we are.

^^^

I agree and...if we want to evolve as a site (which I hope we do) then what's wrong with bringing up the past and looking at how we have progressed? Things may have been discussed in the past but...it's very obvious that a lot of members who are active today were unaware of what is...well P&Q history...shouldn't we all have access to history on any level....it's how we learn....oops that's a different thread!

and...just while I've got my whole cranky attitude going...can some one 'please explain'(Pauline Hanson style) why some poems have 25 comments/13 votes...these members are not people who come on the main boards so are not too well known so....multitude accounts I have figured....can only vote once but hell......can sure leave a lot of comments. and....please do not tell me it's not going on...Phtwwweeeet..it is!

Seems there would be a way for the mods to zero in on the dual accts Hellon...

I do understand that the past plays a role in the present and therefore I'll elaborate on my decision to delete the posts, afterall it wasn't my intention to step on any toes. It wasn't so much the past topic being discussed that was the problem, it was the mentioning of what members had said in the old judges forum in the past (this is what I was refering to as being adressed already) When it was discussed previously we had a lot of bitterness from both sides, those sides being the ones who read what was said and those who actually said it. I know because I can openly admit I too wasn't happy with it at the time. Some of the members that were judges back then that said what they did are still part of this site and I was trying to avoid seeing another outrage like we did back then.

Hellon, if you send me some links to these accounts I'd be happy to look into it.

I read it with my own two eyes and was never asked jack-
but was squashed like a fly
"lights Out"
and threatened with a voodoo doll
yeah i remember
Im done in this thread

Sorry Mel..I really must have missed this discussion...is there a link to it?

Hellon, from what I recall when Connie posted the link in the members forum a lot of members began to clash in that thread and it was discussed in more of an argumentative form (this is what I didn't want to have happen again) I believe one of the judges at the time was quite angry and posted, as did other members and it became quite a battlefield.

Connie, I am not understanding what you're speaking about? I wasn't a mod back then nor a judge.

Yes...I believe you are correct Mel. I will be the first one to put my hand up and say I took advantage of the opportunity provided and...as I said last night..I really didn't like what I saw in there. As a result...I'm never quite sure how to take anything as gospel now....can anyone blame me for that?

And...I undersood Connie's comment...I got a similar threat and...that's why I left.

That night in the Cheesy poetry thread when I was suspended the next day...

Forget it. You said it

Hellon, no one can blame you and it's understandable that you didn't like what you saw. I didn't like what I was told about later on either and that's why I'm glad things have changed around here.

Connie, I am a joker by nature and If I found anything funny it would of been the reference to the voodoo doll as I find them complete rubbish. I don't recall what was said in that thread but I would like to openly apologize if I made a comment that was rude or offended you.

I know this may seem off topic but it's not really. When you find out something (in this case about judges) and you expose it....then you receive threatening pms....what do you do? Complain to a mod well yes...theoretically that's always been an option but...if the member who is giving these threats is pissing in every mods back pocket what do you do then? I left...did I have another choice...at the time I couldn't think of one.

I would say to still complain to the mods, in any circumstance. Mods should deal with any threats, regardless of who is giving them. If you leave, there will be no record of it for the future.

Hellon,

We deal with threats no matter who is sending the. If you have an issue like that then you need to complain on it.

I absolutely agree.

I have been a judge and I enjoyed this job so much, Rabea, Abed and /britt were judges too ...who is the other one ????

sorry for not commenting lately I have a really hard time.

Colm was. He stated it somewhere up there :)

You can't delete history as you can a post, as Abby said, history makes up 9999.9% of who we are not just as individuals but as the whole human race. There are many members who are not aware of how this site evolved, are not aware of the problems we've had, are we to put it aside and say it never happened, how are they to learn? Otherwise are they to make the same mistakes. Are we not taught history at school university etc etc.

Now heres a bit of history and I'm not having a crack at anybody. I've had posts edited, deleted, been suspended a number of times. Was any of it justified, some! but certainly not all.

I think having a post edited or deleted that is relevant and not rude, or even off topic (isn't that how conversation evolves) is head spinning to say the least, it gets your dander up pronto. Censorship by your peers is bloody hard to swallow especially as the Mods are chosen without our consent (though I'm not asking for the system to change, it works 99% of the time, which is pretty bloody good)

Editing or deleting a post must be an absolute last resort, not arbitrary, I think it creates more issues than it solves..

Nicko, while I agree with a lot of what you said, I think if people are going to stir the pot by saying "he said she said" type of things that really have no relevance to the conversation doesn't make sense to keep, it will only create another argument. I don't know why new members need to know judges used to have a specific thread to discuss - unless a new member suggested it and we say it's been done and it didn't particularly work, so this is why we do it the way we do now. But to randomly bring up the sort of past where some people who aren't even members of the site anymore (or rarely, if ever, log in) are involved and it has to do with someone just pissing someone else off... it doesn't really matter (or shouldn't) to any of the newbies.

The past is important, I agree with that, but it's important because we can learn from it. If the past is brought up in a way that teaches nothing to no one, and it's with mal-intent, it doesn't belong here. We can let people play the "he said, she said" game for all to see, or we can stop it before it escalates and makes half of the site bitter and frustrated.

This is an example, and I hope I'm not out of line here.
Remember when I became a moderator and I shared information from the mod forums with my club and then someone hacked into my club and shared a link that gave everyone access to our club forums, resulting in the suspected member's temporary suspension?
If you bring this up objectively, with the purpose to enlighten new members of certain facts, such as 1) Moderators are not allowed to share information from the moderator forums without the express permission of other moderators, or at least not without good judgment and a lack of secrecy, and 2) Club hacking was at one time possible, and it was highly frowned up, often resulting in suspension - then great. We learned something.
If you bring up what happened and litter your explanation with accusations and personal opinions, you're not helping anything or anyone on PnQ. Instead, you're bringing up past arguments and opening old wounds that have long been closed, and it's stunting our ability to grow as a site.

Is that acceptable?

Understand what you're saying Britt but don't think you get the full gist of what im saying. It wasn't so much in reference to this thread, but all threads and all posts in general, I can't comment on the deleted or edited posts in this thread I didn't read them. Lively debate is also to be encouraged not discouraged it helps keep these forums alive.. why come on otherwise??

And i'm not advocating "he said she said"..I didnt say that....

Please you two dont twist what i said...

Well, there is the poetry aspect of it all ;) Haha, just kidding. I definitely do know what you mean. I guess I don't really have any opinion on that right now. I haven't really had a huge issue with being deleted/edited, but the only thing I will say is if it's happens for one, I feel it should for all, to keep it fair. It usually does, but sometimes, does not, and that's when it can be frustrating for those it does happen to.

Not meaning to twist what you said, I was also responding to the other stuff that was being said here. ;)

Nicko, I'm sorry if you think I twisted your words. I guess I was responding to Britt as much as I was responding to you, and rambling besides (it's what I do best!).

I completely agree debating and heated discussions are great, but what one moderator considers crossing the line, another moderator considers acceptable.
I tend to be very lenient and don't mind some fighting, because often it resolves itself. If it's not getting resolved, only escalating, it should be deleted (my perspective).

Think about it, guys, how often do heated posts get deleted when they're not targeting other PnQ members? Almost never. Unfortunately, most heated posts these days aren't related to intellectual arguments, they're personal attacks on peers.

Old boy scout lore Senryu

When two dry poets
are rubbed quickly together
it starts a flame war.

"Editing or deleting a post must be an absolute last resort, not arbitrary"

I totally agree and I think, on the whole, moderators respect this and I'm grateful for that. Deleting someone's post not only insults the poster, but often also everyone else on the site. It is done in the assumption that the members need "protection" and aren't able to deal with things themselves. If a moderator has any doubt about whether to moderate someone else's words or not, they should simply not touch it. Or at least wait to get a second opinion. Melpomene is new and maybe got a little trigger-happy, ha. I don't know, I didn't see the original posts. But I still think Mel is an excellent choice and has the best and fairest of intentions.

People can be offensive, and that is not on. However, I also find irritating the people who constantly get offended. "I'm offended by that statement." What's with that. It has no meaning, it serves no purpose. Yet people are saying it more and more.

If we could just get over past issues or learn to deal with them with a smart attitude, things would be a lot more progressive and refreshing. For instance, we could talk honestly and furiously about P and Q history without worrying about dainty little toes beneath our steps.

Abby, there are PnQ members who aren't bothered by incessant bickering, petty jabs, accusations, attacks, etc. on the main forums, whether they take part in them or not. You're one of those people. You don't stoop to low levels, but you don't mind when others do because you're tough and you don't take this crap too seriously. I respect and appreciate that.
However, there are a lot of members that went into hiding about a year ago when things got out of control on the main forums. The past was being dug up over and over and members couldn't post without fear they would be called out, or sucked in(to drama).
I respect and appreciate that too.
And since we've tightened up on letting peer-to-peer attacks run rampant, many members have reappeared on the forums. It's safer.

Some people don't want protection. Others do. All I know is moderators are here to moderate, so that's what we do. Moderators have existed for as long as PnQ has existed. There aren't "moderators" watching your every move in 'real' life, but on PnQ, it's kinda our job to do just that (unless you're in your club).

This is completely open for debate :)

Jane

I was speaking in an idealistic and theoretical sense, not a practical sense. I realise most people have big egos without the thick skin to match it, or they simply don't like anything but peacelovehappy talk.

Chances are I dislike their poetry.

P.S. I haven't noticed much change in the members visiting the forums in direct relation to moderator tightening... any examples? To me, "safer" means moderators are not being stupidly strict- and the current team is usually really good about that.

P.P.S. Let things go out of control sometimes, I reckon. The worst that can happen is you get to know more.

I don't see any one here that came out of ''hidding'', so to speak, it's the same old people who've always been around (Hi!). ''Protecting the faint heart'' is surely one way to look at it but, the way I see it, there is a big chance you're driving ''active'' people away from the boards and into clubs were they can talk more freely when you moderate their posts or put rules that prevent them from speaking their minds. So, if making the boards more active, you might be really causing more harm than good. But then I'm quality over quantity. Add to that having a weird taste, if we talk about two extremes, I find an argument more interesting than a birthday thread.

As to past incidents, there is no place on earth, that I know of, that has a rule as ridiculous (sorry?) as not bring up past issues. In fact it is known that when you do something you're pretty much responisible for it and for all the reactions it causes be it in the time you've done it or years from it. Also, People do not bring up the past only to learn, but also to relate and reflect, you just don't state an incident saying I've learned a, b and c from it, it's not a class. You just state (or your side/understanding of it) and let people form their own opinions and conclusions. Sometimes they agree, others they don't. It's inevitable.

I've said this before, I'm sure, but deleting a post or preventing the discussion of certain issues does not end, help or solve anything. It's still there, at times even causing an uneasiness and affecting the way members interact with eachother on other threads. So it keeps on going and you guys keep on deleting, issuing warnings and locking threads. Is it awfully hard for mods to just be members on these boards for sometime (at least for a try)?

I think Mods powers (on the boards) should be limited to deleting spam or posts that include insults or threats NOT foreseeing arguments (before any happen, apparently) and preventing them. It'll be easier for both of us. I believe if you just let people talk it out, for a change, they'll actually reach an undertanding, soultion or grow tired of it and end it their own. It's happened before with most of us if you think about it.