Weekly Contest Winners

Dear all, hope all is good.

Kindly note that there are no votes and no comments. The site has made its picks randomly according to its own unknown algorithm . We have no judges yet.

Well done the site and its unknown algorithm then! Worthy winners, all.

I agree with Ben. Congratulations all!

Does anyone know what happened to the 3rd winner this week? It was called Revolution.

Tony suddenly deleted his profile, but so far no one knows why. We are sorry to lose such a talent. Hope he comes back.

Really? I know he moved the poem to the adult section at one point but he then moved it back, I thought he'd just moved it again and it disappeared from the front page as a result...what a shame.

I didn't notice this but I just didn't find his account anymore. Also others asked about him. It is a shame indeed to lose the chance to read his work.

A wonderfully talented writer and a seemingly lovely guy, too. Posted frequently and commented a fair bit. The site needs new members like that. Great shame.

Love the fact there's no judges. Let's see how it goes for a term. If it's crap then put a call out for volunteers. Nobody can accuse the site of being biased.

O dear Rania the algorithm is not that unknown. Okay try my ( psychIc- algorithm) reading: If no judge for this week, Bens syntuit will be the first and his sonnet the second and Plagiarism by yourself the third. Some of the factors of the algorithm is not open to public like in the last P&Q's format was, one: how-many, opened the page and read the work.
So then not having that factor my guess is about sixty percent accurate. But Bens syntuit for sure is going to be there. ( includes both factors)
The algorithm of this site is and has been always the "popularity " facto. whether the site itself or members:
haha so the algorithm is PP rate : p over p : Popularity over poetry. the site's algo.. is 100 over 0. 0 be the poetry, because computer can not comprehend poetry. And the members is: 80% over 20%.

O dear Rania the algorithm is not that unknown. Okay try my ( psychIc- algorithm) reading: If no judge for this week, Bens syntuit will be the first and his sonnet the second and Plagiarism by yourself the third. Some of the factors of the algorithm is not open to public like in the last P&Q's format was, one: how-many, opened the page and read the work.
So then not having that factor my guess is about sixty percent accurate. But Bens syntuit for sure is going to be there. ( includes both factors)
The algorithm of this site is and has been always the "popularity " facto. whether the site itself or members:
haha so the algorithm is PP rate : p over p : Popularity over poetry. the site's algo.. is 100 over 0. 0 be the poetry, because computer can not comprehend poetry. And the members is: 80% over 20%.

"O dear Rania the algorithm is not that unknown. Okay try my ( psychIc- algorithm) reading: If no judge for this week, Bens syntuit will be the first and his sonnet the second and Plagiarism by yourself the third. Some of the factors of the algorithm is not open to public like in the last P&Q's format was, one: how-many, opened the page and read the work.
So then not having that factor my guess is about sixty percent accurate. But Bens syntuit for sure is going to be there. ( includes both factors)
The algorithm of this site is and has been always the "popularity " facto. whether the site itself or members:
haha PP rate : p over p : Popularity 80% and poetry 20."

We'll just have to wait and see :) If I remember correctly, Larry supposed that it awarded to poets with the least amount of wins which seemed plausible for the site update, but there does seem to a bit of randomization to it. Anyway, with the site judging, I have no qualms with that.

Congrats to those who won! It's a shame about Tony, I did some googling and saw he's on another poetry site so I'm glad he's still posting his work on the internet

"Anyway, with the site judging, I have no qualms with that." Haha according to above-said algorithm you CAN'T, have. (because you are popular)

But fun aside I do not have any qualms either. Discrepancy is the human error here, not necessarily the system always.

Yay! The site chose the winners. Congrats!

Now, let’s all click on a new members poem several times during this week. The odds of a newer member winning will be high. The new member will have less wins and more views so...

But, on the other hand, let’s just continue doing what you can. If there are volunteers that’s great. If there are no volunteers, oh well, may be next time.

It’s nice to read you BOB.

Thank you it is nice to be read too, dear Luce.

Are you sure you read them though?? Because according to the algorithm suggested, that is probably %99 accurate, no new member in the judgeless situation, at least this week, could win. In every judgeless situation they can't win unless they come with a subject that attract so many likes, comments and READs that over pass the popular participants.. It did not happen this week and is unlikely to happen any other. But it is possible.

“Are you sure you read them though?? “

-What do you mean by “read them”? Do you mean that if I read poems from new members? Or something else?

If it’s the first question, my answer is..

Well, I didn’t say that I read them. Actually, i have read some poems but not as many as I used to read. My comment was an attempt to suggest to some members to read new members and see what the outcome is. If the algorithm is by popularity (views, comments, and less wins) we can try to figure out for sure (if anyone is interested). Though in order for a new member to win, their poems have to be nominated first. However, it’s just a suggestion. We aren’t certain what the algorithm is, and to be completely honest, I just came to see the weekly because a poem was missing on the front page... that caught my attention. I’ve been distant from the whole weekly contest. From time to time I log in to read some poems. I’m not even commenting. :( (may be one or two)

If you meant something else, please ignore the above. I’m just rambling.

I know you are good at reading poems; you've always been that way. I wish I were as good as you in that, me being dyslexic and all. I meant you did not pay attention to the ( so called) algorithm suggested by me while you said good reading them.

Good idea, and what you said actually makes me wonder, what does popularity mean here exactly ? For example, my name was mentioned in the section up above by David though I never thought I belong to the popular section, like I do not have many people commenting on my work ? Last week other poems had more comments and likes than "Teamtime" poem and thus I can never tell who reads my work since if you check them, ain't getting reviews since ages, which is because I failed for a long period now to leave feedback all the time on others' poems too, but I try whenever possible. And I do read for new members and i do nominate poems by new members. Was Tony on the popular list too? I just can't seem to make a definition to what is meant by that word. AND in ALL scenarios, I think if someone doesn't have a qualm with the situation, it isn't because they're popular but because, at least speaking on my behalf, I never wrote to be nominated or to have my page stuck on the front page for 1 week. I never published my poems since 2007 elsewhere until last month, even my friends did not know I write, only a few and only a couple of poems. This is a dairy for me, my writings are very personal and it's my secret gate. Maybe some don't like how I write, maybe others do, this was never my concern. I posted this thread to point out that the winners were not chosen by judges, so maybe some members would come forward and volunteer, otherwise I'll just not post anything and enjoy that"popularity" is taking my poems to the frontpage and not the content of my material, according to the analysis posted here.

The site has no owner, well not around at least. No matter how this site works, it's no member's fault.

Dear Rania I meant Your poem was popular. And the rate of your popularity was very high due to your participation in "napowrimo" and fresh poetries. We all know all about how fair a person you are.

Yes got you, but what I'm saying Tony didn't have many reviews and his poem was on the front, so how does that equation work? and also, if it's about views, does anyone know if several views by same user count? Let's say I go over your poem and then feel like reading it again, are all my visits counted? I do not know, since Janis deprived us from that option too! It's nothing that we can solve I believe. I think whoever feels like the weekly contest (which I hate calling it by that btw) makes a difference should try spare time for it, but we all know it's an inactive site and this doesn't matter anymore obviously.

I said the first factor must be 'likes', second 'comments', and the tired 'reads'. perhaps Tony had high score combination of those, or my suggested algorithm is bogus .
Tony had wonderful poetry and present in this site and in such short notice made his mark in the front page and this site.

Agreed.

Oh sorry.

You don't need to be sorry. I just keep reminding my friends when they do not pay attention for greater good. I know it bugs people when you confront themof such, but if you have enough love, you would dare.

Me too, I agree with you and me too.

In my opinion, if there are no volunteer judges I dont think there will be more members who view, read or comment on poems by new members.

For any of this to change we don’t need a discussion ( thought it’s interesting to read), we need more active members.
I have hope though, there are more returning and new members.

EDIT: I think last week’s winners are all deserving. Also it really is a shame that Tony left.

Think we could put to rest that there is an algorithm, it seems random. Way less code as well that way.

http://sandbox.onlinephpfunctions.com/

it would look something like:

<?php
$input = array(1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8,9,10,11,12,13,14,15,16,17,18,19,20,21,22,23);
$rand_keys = array_rand($input, 3);
echo $input[$rand_keys[0]] . "\n";
echo $input[$rand_keys[1]] . "\n";
echo $input[$rand_keys[2]] . "\n";
?>

1-23 being the poems that were nominated, $rand_keys[] will select a random poem from the nominated poems,

you can copy-paste that code into http://sandbox.onlinephpfunctions.com/ and run it and see it select poems randomly.

Yes it is random. And my algorithm suck .

I guess now we have pattern!!

Not really, we don't

The pattern is flower. Program randomly picks up flower avatars in order to depict or assume poetical.
But jock aside don't worry dear Ranea, everybody knows you are not picking them out. You are highly intelligent, no-one is that mentally damaged around here to do such thing. for sure not you..
But the possibility of a jackpot like this is one in a 5 or 6 numbers on top of my mind.

The pattern is flower. Program randomly picks up flower avatars in order to depict or assume poetical.
But jock aside don't worry dear Ranea, everybody knows you are not picking them out. You are highly intelligent, no-one is that mentally damaged around here to do such thing. for sure not you..
But the possibility of a jackpot like this is one in a 5 or 6 numbers on top of my mind.

Have you seen last weeks nominations? They were about 10 poems only, four or five of them were Rania’s. I still think it’s random, the odds were in her favor.

First of all I said that is random. You do not believe that I was serious about flowers?
I do not believe it was 5 only nomination, It was around 20, and four was Ranea.
It was an oddity, If you want me to do the mat for you. I am good at it.

But If my joking around, by any-means, mean to you, that I meant Ranea is deceitful, I strongly object. I know her for more than ten yeas. She is a good friend of mine for the 6 years of them. I stand behind her 100%.

There were only 11 nominatins this week, so this outcome is far from unlikely considering Rania's nominatinons. I'm not commenting either way on whether or not the site is purely random in its choosing, but in this instance, there is certainly not enough evidence by half to suggest it isn't.
Mark, where are you, good man?

I am pretty sure that didn't cross your mind. Anyone with common sense would notice that it doesn't make sense. My last win was a poem written April 26. I had a couple of my poems nominated each week since then. None were picked by the site. Last week two were for Mark and the week before for 3 different people and the same for the week before it. Even on weeks when I had more than two nominated neither went to the front page. It won't suddenly favor me now. It's just a coincidence. Hope no one has an issue with sunflowers though.

What are you talking about. If even it was 11 the outcome is one in the 4 digit numbers.
It was very interesting thing ( coincident) that happened, that is all.

“ But If my joking around, by any-means, mean to you, that I meant Ranea is deceitful, I strongly object. I know her for more than ten yeas. She is a good friend of mine for the 6 years of them. I stand behind her 100%”
^
No I didnt mean that nor was I intending it.

Not sure, Ddavidd as i actually dont know how many nominations she had. I didn't know you were aware either. It was a good few though, wasn't it?

O I am aware of so many things that the members do not even appreciate or think about it here.

She is a good poet. I know it from long ago. But that is beside the point. She did not win the way she wants to. I am sure she doesn't appreciate winning in this way. Who cares for a random wining??
One only should appreciate this things when they are genuine.

This is the math: 2,5 % possibility (or 0ne in 40) for wining 3 out of 11 while you have 4 nomination. I guess you can appreciate it is very odd. Though I thought to be way odder.