Narphangu
12 years ago
I'm with Abby on this one. |
abracadabra
12 years ago
Britt, I suppose knowledge of power and choice is nice to have, whether you use it frequently or not. Plus, it affects everyone's voting rights, which affects the front page, which represents the whole site. |
abracadabra
12 years ago
Narphy, yes, members could have a shortlist tool as well as the judges. Or they could pop it in their "favourite poems" page in the meantime. |
silvershoes
12 years ago
"You can leave 30 great comments in a couple of slow days in your life. 30 comments also don't necessarily mean you read widely. It could be commenting on the same three poets you always read. Same goes for your third point." |
Hellon
12 years ago
Jane.. |
abracadabra
12 years ago
It is just a ridiculous title change, you're right. But words are important, especially around here. People are reading too much into the advantages/elitism of being a "senior"- implying longer memberships and lots of poems or favourites give members advantages- when in fact the only difference is the right to nominate a poem, which should only need to be earned though some demonstration of critique. We may be implementing this system now, hence Jane's point A. This makes "nominator" more pertinent. |
L
12 years ago
"You can leave 30 great comments in a couple of slow days in your life. 30 comments also don't necessarily mean you read widely. It could be commenting on the same three poets you always read. Same goes for your third point. |
Britt
12 years ago
Why are we voting with most people saying higher numbers, and now its said we should just do 10? |
sibyllene
12 years ago
I agree with most of Jane's list, especially "a." The more I think of it, the more I start to believe that higher number of comments required wouldn't make too much of a difference. There are many active members here who would want to "catch up," and who would probably do it pretty quickly. Then we're back to where we started. But I'd still be in the 8-15 category, rather than 3. But that's what we're voting on. |
Colm
12 years ago
I think poems should be able to be nominated any time, people mightn't be around on Wednesday or Thursday. If you see a good poem on a different day it doesn't really make sense to have to wait to nominate it. If there was no rollover there would be no need to shorten the time a poem can be nominated for. If its nominated before Friday its eligible for judging that weekend or after, if its nominated that weekend it will only be eligible for next week. |
Narphangu
12 years ago
Sibs, I think that d, while it wouldn't limit the amount of nominations for the judges, would get people who really wanted to participate to expand their horizons and look elsewhere for poems. If their choice poem from their "usual" list of poets is already nominated, they might choose to visit new poets to find something else. |
silvershoes
12 years ago
Yes, what Narph wrote, and also because I think when a poem has a load of nominations under its names it will be more favored by judges than another poem that has only one nomination under its name. The poems on the nomination page are meant to be weighed equally so I don't see why they should need to receive more than one nomination. It is pointless anyway, it's not like more nominations on a poem serve a real purpose? |
The Queen
12 years ago
"c) Increase the required number of Praised Comments leading to Nominator Status from 3 to 10, in other words, from the Silver Award to the Gold Award. |
silvershoes
12 years ago
I apologize if I'm confusing people. Emphasis on the above statement, "These are all things [I] would like to see implemented." |
abracadabra
12 years ago
If anybody has reconsidered their preferred minimum number, perhaps change that now so it can be averaged when voting ends. |
A lonely soul
12 years ago
Stopping the rollover week to week, establishing a cutoff deadline of Thurs night for noms and/or max of 30 poems, and giving judges Fri, Sat and part of Sun to read and decide will reduce the current list approaching 45 by 1/3rd. The poems nominated after Thurs or when max is reached can simply go on to a waiting list/overflow list for automatic placement back on nom list for the following week. Mods please consider voting on a) cut off date for noms, b) cut off max # c) stopping rollover, next please. I believe about 15-18 of the 43 or so on the list currently are rollovers! |
abracadabra
12 years ago
So...I just pretended to be a judge. It took me 20 min to narrow 42 nominations to 7 candidates. |
Hellon
12 years ago
Jane...I wasn't targeting you at all....I was replying to your post and just used your number of comments as an example. A lot of members on this site will be in the same situation as you if SMS is based solely on this number and not on the length of time a person as been a member. |
Larry Chamberlin
12 years ago
The final tally of those actually voting: |