More about judges

Some pointers
No one ever said judges are suppose to be miracle workers. We are regular people who sometimes for the sake of our togetherness in this site take upon ourselves the task of judging others poetry. We all know our judgment is limited and very personal and there are always bias tendencies, more or less, affecting their outcomes. We all have different tastes and opinion about poetry that might seem ridicules to the eyes of the others. So none of these judging are final. These are just suggestions. These are only struggle to better ourselves and challenge us to strive for better poetry. We must not let these wining go to our head; there are lots of times that the best poems do not get elected for the rang of reasons, mostly the lack of time and effort, attention(due to the force of the hectic personal life) and personal preference of the judges.
In the Colm survey there was the range between 20 minutes to 15 hours (me) that judges claimed spending for each week. So the commitments are very different. There are also different levels of knowledge and expertise in poetry, art and English language amongst us . This also contributes to different outcomes and environment in each tree month period.
But unfortunately we don't have the luxury to keep those expert or more solid judges permanently so we have to expect the different mood and environment each time.
In the end judges should also come down from their high horses and listen to constrictive criticism and suggestions for betterment. The transition is difficult sometimes and painful but any progression and birth, comes with the birthmark of pain, there is no choice.

Like Sib in the last thread, I also can't understand how a judge is supposed to judge without their personal stylistic preferences getting in the way. It's like asking a person not to be a person. And also, isn't that the whole bloody point of poetry? It isn't like assessing the colours, sizes and roundnesses of M&Ms in a box. It is SUPPOSED to be subjective. It is supposed to hit the human somewhere in you, and there are lots of different humans and ways to feel. That's why having 3-5 judges every week is a good thing.

When I judged, I had no problem with dismissing a poem within three lines of reading. I knew what worked for me, and what didn't... and what simply couldn't. I naturally judged with everything that was personal to me - with all the things I've read and seen and heard and experienced - and this personal relationship to certain pieces of poetry is the beautiful gift that each judge offers, blind to the other, every single week. It should be valued, not forced to hide.

Is it an offering that is in mode, that is predictable, that conflicts with other opinions? Perhaps! and so what? The truth is, a good writer is a consistent writer, and they write consistently good pieces. I like that the front page has that level of competition - can your poem unseat the throne, beat the flavour of the season? We all want to discover a new writer...but the good ones are few and far between. And to discredit a poem's win just because its writer happens to be popular or a moderator or a club member is a completely unfair and insulting, given that judges aren't corrupt...and if they are, the overall system won't stand for it.

I feel that each judge feels the responsibility of their choices and wants to do the fairest job they can. I've been a judge for three terms and I can safely say that from any nominated pool, usually three poems from the top 20% (in terms of relative quality) made it to the front page. That's not bad.

The judges are fine and the contest is as fair as possible under the circumstances. All we can do is to encourage good writing, read more poems, welcome new writers with comments, nominate them and see if what strikes a chord with us happens to resonate with a judge or two as well. It might and it might not and it's all delightful.

Well, of course, that's only your opinion and...mine is different regarding judging. I can only really compare judging contests that members have put up here as I've said and...it's easier when they are anonymous of course but...let me just say that I try to judge fairly...one poem in particular comes to mind...it was by Larry (the bull fight that I couldn't see haha) and, while I actually didn't like the content of the write 100% it was still one of the best submitted in that round and...yes, I voted accordingly.

I still can't understand how you can't like something but still feel compelled to vote for it. What dictates that it's the best and you must vote for it, even if it's at the cost of what you personally are drawn toward?

I view poems differently when I'm judging I guess. I'm not attached to the poem or poet in anyway so it's easier for me...does that sound weird...probably? I do not have a favourites list and generally only read poems when a member is signed in at the same time as me so...maybe I see a larger spectrum than some maybe smaller ? I do not seek out any poet on this site on a regular basis because I like their particular style is what I'm saying.

I doubt anyone wants to pay attachment to the poet when they're judging as that would make it corrupt, but how can you not feel attached to a poem when you vote for it? What makes you vote for it then? Being a non-club member or not having favourites do not automatically give a person a lack of personal preference toward what a good poem consists of.

Well..not being a club member and not having a favourites list helps of course. If a member posts a poem in a certain form..obviously I will check to see if they've got it right...I do this anyway regardless of whether I nominate it or not...to be honest, I think, by not having a favourites list it is much easier for me...I do remember one of your poems in particular I wrote along the lines...I will eat my Acubra if this does not win...at the time I do believe you and I were in 'debate' about something else on the main boards but...it didn't stop me from knowing this poem would and should be a winner :)

Only getting around to replying to this now Hellon (from the other thread)

'As for my suggestion...did you even discuss it in the mod room before discarding it completely?'

^
I didn't take it to the mod room because I know it wouldn't have worked in that format and I didn't see the point in waiting for the other mods to say the same and delay my reply. It wasn't really a matter of opinion moreso fact (poems can't be nominated at the weekend and we need our voting buttons to negate glitch votes). Also the contest has been discussed many times and similar suggestions have been decided against in the past. But thanks for trying to think of an alternative.

I can try to organise the poet of the month type contest if there's a demand for it but there wasn't any replies to it in the previous thread (its basically just any member can submit a poem via pm to be judged anonymously and winners are announced on the forums at the end of the month).

As regards voting for preference etc. I can see both sides of the argument, that a poem has to have a certain standard that should be obvious to any eye that knows something about poetry. But liking a poem or connecting with it is part of what makes a poem a poem. If a poem has no impact on the reader or if the reader finds themselves indifferent to it, then it could be said that that is a fault of the poem because poems are meant to evoke feeling and thought. In that case it is natural for judges to lean towards poems they can really get into, regardless of author. Personal preference or natural liking should be complimented with a knowledge of and ability to spot good technique and craft, but to focus solely on the later is bad judging technique.

Also, it would be unfair and/or bias to not vote for a poem that you like simply because you like it. Liking a poem should be a point in its favour, not a pressure to pick something else.

Also I think two more things are worth noting in relation to the general contest/judging/favouritism issue:

1) It is often or even usually the 'popular' poets that win the monthly, anonymous, multi-round contests done through the boards. The same names often pop up on the winning lists of those and the weekly contest, anonymous judging or not.

2) Without dragging up ancient history, the contest has improved quite a lot in the past few years. There was a time in the past when no comments or feedback were given by judges, when there were only 2 or 3 judges for long periods of time and when judges knew who each other were and discussed their votes together. The current contest (5 varied judges, feedback for choices, more rotation in judging panels, mod co-operation in hosting) is about as accountable as it has been and/or can be under the circumstances.

Hellon, it seems like you are more saying that your opinion of the poet shouldn't affect your reading of the poem - which I think just about everyone agrees with.

I know I have seen many instances where judges have voted for poems written by people that I know they were NOT on friendly terms with... so this seems like something that many people are quite able to do.

I (and I think Abby? Don't want to speak for you) am more wondering about how you and others would propose leaving personal feelings about the poems themselves out of the judging process.

Edit to quote: "I like that the front page has that level of competition - can your poem unseat the throne, beat the flavour of the season?"

I kind of like the competition aspect as well. But this brings up the Big Question again: What do we want the contest to be? A show of skill, or a setting to showplace new talent and new members?

Both are valid. Both would have different outcomes. 1 would necessarily probably have a smaller representation of members, while 2 would have more variety, but (perhaps) less overall quality?

Point is, this is our site and we can make it whatever we want!

Still getting accustomed to not seeing red letters under Sib's name!

I think it was (mostly) agreed in the past to have 'quality over quantity' (i.e. best poems picked each week regardless of author) in the past as opposed to sharing wins around, but its certainly a worthwhile debate.

If Janis was feeling the new year's spirit, maybe he would come around and set up a 'Upcoming poet of the week' prize to share the front page that could only be won by poets with non-senior member status or with few/no awards.

Abby, you are right bout the constant winners or club members or ... that we can't discriminate against them. I agree with you. Every competition is anew and the only predicate the only thing that matters is the works that are presented.

But when you said "how a judge is supposed to judge without their personal stylistic preferences getting in the way. It's like asking a person not to be a person. And also, isn't that the whole bloody point of poetry?"

It is a good point I am glad you brought up the subject. I think your problem and the problem of so many members like Siby and those who agree with her is exactly there. You indulge in the notion of the self too much. In becoming a judge, instead of switching to neutral version of yourself, you become more of yourself. Yes this is what distinct a true judge from others, exactly the ability of doing that. Like the word "arbitrator" means a person that could sit and see between the parties and be able to be unengaged with either sides. But not you guys, you think as a king would like :
"Now that I am a judge the only thing that is matter is me, my taste, my opinion, my believes."
This is a bad judgment about judging. When you are at the panel you are not working for yourself. You haven't inherited a throne. You accept the duty of a public service worker and yes Hellon is hundred present right, you have to vote sometime against your wish. Imagine if a referee of a soccer game say the same thing as you did:
"I did this and that because I am a person, and being a person entail certain distinctiveness and character and therefor preference, so then I declare penalty against Barcelona because I like Liverpool better."

When we are hired as a judge ( or volunteered ) we are only hired for our expertise and knowledge and experience in poetry (haha if there are any). We are not hired because we have certain friends or preference. Our individuality has much less to do with it than what you believe.

"Now that I am a judge the only thing that is matter is me, my taste, my opinion, my believes."

^^^ I doubt that this is the case. We keep a panel of judges for a reason, to keep people honest.

The judges select three poems from all the poems than each member of PNQ nominates and the judges selects the ones that the feel are worthy.

It is not about Oh.. they are my friend and since I am a judge I am going to vote for them no matter what...

It is what each poem a judge thinks and feels is worthy to win from ALL the nominations.

I really like the fact that so many people can get upset because the judges do not pick a certain poem; however in all reality how many members are stepping to volunteer and be a judge. Not even 1% of the PNQ population is willing to do the job.

To ALL the judges, (past, present, and future) thank you for you thankless job and task of going through each and every poem. Thank you for stepping up to the platform despite that comments and snide remarks. Thank you for being that 1% of PNQ!

Abby:
"It isn't like assessing the colours, sizes and roundnesses of M&Ms in a box. It is SUPPOSED to be subjective. It is supposed to hit the human somewhere in you, and there are lots of different humans and ways to feel. That's why having 3-5 judges every week is a good thing. "

In this part being subjective is a relative notion. When you are chosen as an eye, you are chosen as an independent eye who suppose to have some good general idea about beauty, portions and all aesthetic values. But you are right in some extend, that you are still an eye, who sees, and seeing is nothing but interpretation. But imagine this way: an art professor when she sees the lines of her student's drawing she would right away see if they are professional or not, or if they are aesthetically acclaimed or totally out of wack. Her opinion abut the STYLE of the student DRAWING, is however, irrelevant, otherwise she is considered bias. A philosophy professor only could grade you based on the strength of your philosophical argument not based on his OPINION about philosophical notions. If he does so he is going to get fired.

however this was the most problematic part of what you said: "I had no problem with dismissing a poem within three lines of reading."
in this case I have no problem ( If it was up to me) to dismiss you from the panel. This shows impatience and arrogance in the manner of judging. Lots of times poems that start in vague and confusion end strongly and powerfully. I even know of poets who did that on purpose as the trademark of their poetry.

I hope that this would not be a case. I was only discussing the natural outcome of Abby and Siby's argument abut how personal a referee could view the subject matter.

So, if there are two poems that have the exact same "aesthetic value," (since you seem to be making the argument that this is something that can be quantified) and you like one but don't like the other, which one should you choose? The one you like, because you like it? Or the one you don't like, because if you picked the one you liked it would be biased?

This could never happen in the real world . Two things could never be identically similar to the exact. So hypothetically speaking I would teach myself a lesson and choose the one I do not like.
But that is me.
But in the real world I would search for the smallest details (in the subjects not in me) that could change the balance in favor of one of them.

I understand not voting for a poem because of the poet, but not voting for a poem because of the poem? If you like it, vote for it. Obviously the author shouldn't sway your opinion, but choosing the poem you don't like simply because you don't like it makes no sense. Does this mean you select poems you think are bad because what you think is bad must be good? Is that some kind of self-deprecating feat of grandeur? Won't that kind of behavior lead to poor quality poetry on the front page?

Are you guys claiming to understand what good poetry is without your personal tastes getting involved? Hellon and RM, are you suggesting that your opinions (of what constitutes good poetry) are not opinions at all, but fact, lacking subjectivity? I would appreciate it if the two of you could review the nominations page each week and let us know which poems are factually the best. While you're at it, include which poems are "in your opinion," the best. It might help the rest of us understand what you're getting at.

Dang Jane,

Wish I had a like button, but since I do not

LIKE LIKE LIKE LIKE LIKE

Ddavidd, I know you feel you are wise and all, and what you say sounds very noble and good... but you just compared judging poetry to refereeing a soccer game. Since I think writing poetry is like playing soccer without the boundary lines (err...I don't know enough about sport to continue this simile), I don't think we are going to see eye to eye here.

I've been trying to insinuate what Jane said so bluntly and beautifully. You seem to judge poetry with a bias derived from anti-bias. Fascinating stuff.

Silvershoe
The first part of your question tells that you really did not understand the conversation between me and Siby. She asked me if two are exactly equal which I would choose, the one according to my taste or the one which is as good and is different from my personal liking. My answer was in that scientifically impossible situation, I would choose the second one just base on the fact that I really wish to extinguish in me the flame of the desire to go for my liking. It is a selfish act. It seems irrational or it is rational in the way you would not understand. I think sybi did, or maybe not I do not know.

For the second part of your question I already answered in my two responds to Abby, in detail, the dynamic of how much personality one could apply, according to my view.
For asking the member to agree with you, it does not change anything because we are not voting. And if we did I can assure you that the "real meaning " as always is an absurdity around here. You do not have to brag about it I already know. We are here just having some conversation.

Abby
I as always try to shed light and make things better to the best of my ability, only by stating my mind. If it looks that I'm trying to look noble in your end, so be it. But maybe I am the way I am. I am least pretentious; I do not even brag about my wining poems in my featured section. I have nothing to brag about. So I try to the best of my ability to go the other direction. And the unusual ness of my approaches sometimes looks absurd to others and makes the average Jose s angry.

About what Silvershoe's said, The bluntness and beauty that you brag about is coming from a bias point of view, why? because the question was : what if they were identically equal, so there are no bias here. I could say I would flip a coin as far as I concern. But I chose the tilted side of the equation, because of the selfish reason. This way at least I make a difference, I would teach myself a lesson.
There I am being bias but against my own ego.

About the soccer referee: you really now resorting to the religious aspect of art: Gosh it is a sin to compere such divinity to the common sport. But studying any phenomena you have to find the point of similarities . and that is exactly what I did

I would appreciate it if the two of you could review the nominations page each week and let us know which poems are factually the best. While you're at it, include which poems are "in your opinion," the best. It might help the rest of us understand what you're getting at.

^^^

Well since you ask...so far there are two poems nominated by an author who is still of doubt on this site...eg..is he really the published person he claims to be or is he someone posting poems by a famous published author? There is still doubt, as far as I'm aware, on this member so...I would not consider either if I was judging. I'm not a lover of collabs but...as a judge I know I would have to read them...one has been nominated by the other half of the collab so, that would be disregarded too. Mmm...Yaki's poem is a contender IMO but...looking at the layout I'd say she's pulled it off her facebook account once more and hasn't bothered to fix it?

I came across a poem by a new member today that I think has a lot of potential but, as it lacked punctuation, I left a suggestion to fix it up but...did not nominate (yet) because, for the moment, as is, it's not suitable for the front page.

Hey Hellon, I really appreciate how directly you're answering Jane's question, it must be quite a revealing exercise to conduct in front of everyone.

What I find interesting is that what is an especially unbiased procedure to you seems quite biased to me. If I judge, I judge only the poem. I click on the link, read the words, feel them and make up my mind.

Whereas the first thing you seem to do is to look at who has written it (e.g. Satish Verma who you deemed no good as he may or may not be posting his own poem- something I don't give a hoot about) or who has nominated it (e.g. collab people - but then, if the poem is worthy and the site still allows it, who cares?), and then proceed with the judging. This is exactly what I try NOT to do. Like why is the background context of Yaki's poem worth thinking about? Many times during judging, I would leave lots of constructive criticism in my comment - the poem doesn't have to perfect, but if it still resonates better than the others, it's worth it, even if you would personally format it differently.

I think spelling/grammar mistakes are the only concrete thing we both judge with, though I would even let a couple of those slip through if the poem was good enough.

All that matters to me is the poem as it stands alone. Seems to be quite different to your style and what you peceive as fair. Really, really interesting.

Abby...I don't have a personal problem with Satish Verma or his poems...if he is, in fact Satish Verma, who is a published author posting on this site. The last I heard Larry was trying to find out if he was, in fact the person he claimed to be or a member posting these poems. If he is a member (not the author) of these poems then I consider that plagerism and would not consider them (at the moment) as front page material.

As for Yaki's poem...IMO..the layout right now is spoiling this poem. I spoke to her about a couple of others she had posted on here and she told me she had dragged them over from her face book account and the layout altered in the process...she changed the last one I pointed out so...I was just making her aware that the same thing had happened here. Yeah...perhaps I should have pm'd her but...Jane did ask for my opinion so...I gave it...no frills attached.

We are all judges whether we like it or not.

Each time we log in we might click on the odd poem here and there. If we don't like it we don't comment. Or if we like the person we might comment what we think could improve it. If we do like it we comment and sometimes nominate.

The difference is with the site judges they have to leave at least three decent comments each week and choose a score.

When I judged some weeks were easier than others. I read every poem on the nomination page that week. However there were a few that I would only read about half and dismiss. Not to my taste. That is probably what I judged on.
But my taste is very varied, but also changes often, I go from forms to rhymes to dark to happier to insane.

There were some Fridays I was in a bit of a Man-mood probably having a period and I didn't like anything. Those weeks were tough to comment.

I think there can be a smidging of favouritism here and there, I certainly found it easier to judge and comment when I wasn't in a club. I went through my loner stage at that time which rears its head now and again. (Ravens and free spirits can confirm that)

If this site is going to continue then I think senior members have a duty to seek out and comment on newer members poetry. Offer advice etc.
Also there are members who have been registered for a number of years on here who only have 2 or 3 comments across twenty poems so they have a vast number of poems with no feedback. Some of these poems may only need a tweak to be worthy of a nomination.

ramble over.

Update to Satish Verma:

I am informed by members who have PMd with him that he does indeed claim to be the man himself.

We might never be able to establish it 100% certain, but it appears he is who he claims.

"This could never happen in the real world . Two things could never be identically similar to the exact."

If there is (as you and others seem to be arguing in this thread, correct me if I'm wrong) such a thing as an "objective poetic quality" that exists outside of any subjective trappings or personal feelings surrounding a poem, then that is something that should be consistently measurable. If it can be measured, then they could certainly be equal.

Of course, this is probably BS in the real world, just as, in my opinion, the existence of objectivity in poetry is BS.

Come on Siby!!
Two things cannot be perfectly match because nothing could be perfect in the corporeal world.
Even two exact measurements can not be exactly equal in the realm of concretes. The mathematical exactness only exist in the world of concepts. Exactly the same way that there are not any general tree in the nature and every tree is an individual and specific that shares the notion of treeness with all other trees, all the real measurements also are approximate. Even scientist with the most sensitive tools in lab can not create objects to the exact measurement accuracy up to the ultimate smidgens.
The idea of two thing definitely equal is as farfetched as two thing exactly similar.
More impossible than finding two things exactly equal (like stones , or fishes or apples) in the corporeal world it is finding equal objects in the world of art.
How could we even start to measure music, painting, poetry... If you like you can check this lunacy:
http://www.poems-and-quotes.com/discussion/topic.html?topic_id=141065

I think your post unknowingly verifies Sibs' point, RM.

I am so glad you use your faculty of thinking.

haha I was going to ask you how so, then you might realize the point while trying to put the pieces together, but I realized you are not going to go there being where you are.

So just remember I love you all my old mates.

~~Admission of Being Wrong ~~

To Abby and Siby and all who fallowed
During this discussion Siby asked me: In case that two poems are exactly equal,( which is utterly impossible in real life) as a judge, which one would I choose: the one which I like better based on familiarity to the style or the way of thinking or even friendship, or the other one? And my answer was the other one because in that way the best course of action would be to choose the one that makes a difference and choosing the other one would exactly do that since they both are equally good, I could even flip a coin, so why not choosing the one that would help me to shrink my own ego, and that would be a recognition of betterment, in this case, to my understanding.
But now coming to think of it~~ I ADMIT I WAS WRONG~~ a true judge could not do that. For the reason that It would be bias to the person who wrote the poem which I like better. Because, he or she has done nothing to deserve that and being my friend or someone who has the style in which I like better should not be the bass for discrimination because of my attempt to be self righteous. So again I admit I WAS WRONG and the right course of action in that (thanks to God impossible) situation would be filliping a coin, according to me and my conscience.

Well, I believe flipping a coin is a surer bet than simply not choosing the poem you like best because you like it best.

It takes a lot to say, "I was wrong." Of course no one's opinion on this is really 'wrong,' but thanks for meeting your opponent halfway :)

First of all you are such a sweetest girl specially with your mustache. Second you were never my opponent. You should know me by know I always challenge me and my friends for betterment. Last I never meet anyone in half way . If I am right I do not compromise at least not in the world of meaning: truth is not bendable for me . I just realized I was wrong in that part of my argument and felt dishonest if I did not confess.

Edited:
"It is vitally important for a warrior to take responsibility for his/her mistakes."
Don Juan