Judges Please #II

I have tried all week to avoid answering this but...I can't

Hellon,

First of all, quit trying to kid yourself. You are not kidding anyone else. Your focus is and has been Ben.

Perhaps Ben does not write to your taste. Perhaps you are mistaking talent for popularity. I remember when Ben first started he was unsure of his poetry. We PMd occasionally due to his lack of familiarity with forms. He took to it like the proverbial duck to water.

The plain fact is that Ben is as awesome a writer as this site has seen in the 11+ years I have been here, with the possible exception of Melpomene. If you cannot accept that then I question your own bias.

This thread has already exceeded the 100 post limit so I will close it. If you want to continue start another one.

^^^
No...My focus was not about Ben...it was about asking the judges to look further afield to consider new members who may have slipped under the radar that was all.

Whether Ben writes to my taste or not should not have been questioned by you or anyone else because it had nothing to do with it to start with. This post below may have changed the course of the topic but please remember I was making a 'flippant hypothetical scenario" from a question Jamie asked and I made that VERY CLEAR

Milly's response

We have recently seen an increase in discontent. Threads condemning members who respond to the comments left on their poems - (Which by the way is considered good manners in most cultures). Now we have a post casting aspersions on the integrity and ability of judges - it seems purely on the basis that the judges opinions differ from their own.

What I would like to say to the people suffering from such discontent - Consider instead the alternative.. Imagine that the site no longer exists how much worse that would be? Rather than complain about things that you cannot change be grateful for what you have....- For I think you would be hard pressed to find another poetry site that is half as good as this one. If there was then you would surely be there already and much happier.

^^^

This is what led the subject change...not anything I instigated.

and...for you to lock the thread so I could not respond is very 'un-super-mod' like IMO

Hellon is correct when she says she was just responding to my question. Idk why people are making a big deal out of it. Also after rereading the last thread a bit, and this is personal opinion- Comments are the most important thing on this site if you go by the "letters" you can get. F/C/P/D.

Unless i am mistaken there is another way people can nominate poems besides the ten praised comments. I just haven't pinpointed it yet.

As far as I concerned Janis paved the way for senior status through two options:

1 Silver C - receiving up to 10 praises at least, etc
&
2 Silver F - being added by 20 users to favorite poets' list. (i mean how many people added you to their favorites)

I am not a fan of this discussion for the obvious monotonic mindset that has taken this site. But I testify here that Larry's claim is false. Hellon was not insinuating Ben. I know that because I and Hollen few times argued about the same subject and context, privately, those time that I was under attack and angry.

However, I think she is too obsessed with what is happening in the weekly judging because due to the human nature, even the best of us cannot be impartial coming to judge our friends, our fellow countrymen, our families and...

But however, the point is that she has all the right to question anything that affects the collective here in a democratic manner. That is what parliaments are for in a democratic system, that is what the 'Sit's Guideline" is for. In it, has never mentioned that members have no right to raise a complaint.

To prove the point that Hellon concern was not unreasonable, is suffice to say: even in the universities, nowadays arrange for the professors s and TA.s to mark the essays and exams anonymously, without seeing the student name (only numerical id) because the academic system is intelligent enough to know, and is not egoistic as much, to get offended if someone tells them there is almost impossible to be impartial while judging. It is beyond our cerebral control. So all of us should ask ourselves: "Are we really more knowledgeable about the subject of the human psyche than academics. Obviously, the higher the level of the intelligence goes the more we learn how fallible we are, instead of getting furious when even someone dares to mention that to us."
I think Darren's formula:: A*(N/J)=W . is really cute.

Ah thank you for the answer.

I find it really disappointing that favoritism is a criteria for people being able to nominate poems, I find it to be a slap in the face for people who actually take time to comment well, but oh well. It is another thing I would love to see fixed if Janis ever shows up and works on the site.

“Whether Ben writes to my taste or not should not have been questioned by you or anyone else because it had nothing to do with it to start with.” By Hellon

^^If you didn’t want your taste to be questioned in the first place by ANYONE, you shouldn’t have brought Ben in your comments after your “flippant hypothetical scenario”. (I really don’t remember if it was before or after that you brought him)

I do remember this which made me question your motives:

“Mark...without a doubt you are very good at crunching numbers and to highlight Andrea with 1169 poems posted and 50 wins sounds really good but when I look at Ben Pickard who has only been here (rejoined I know) since Feb 2018 with 115 poems posted and 28 wins that percentage changes.

Having said that...this thread started out with a concern I have about how the judges vote so...can you run another spread sheet for that?” By Hellon

And right after that me asking,

“Hmmm, interesting

What exactly is your concern Hellon?
Is it that Ben is winning more than others?
” by Everlasting

A simple reply to my question may have helped me form a different opinion but I received no reply. Edit( or at least I didn’t see it, did you reply to me?) Then came the following comment written by you:

“OMG Mark you are amazing!!! You have taken number crunching to another level so I really thank you for the time you have taken here (I couldn't open your spread sheet link but I probably would not have understood it anyway:) What I did think I understood was that Andrea joined in 2011 so her 52 wins are spread over 8 years (I've taken it back to 7 years because she joined at the end of 2011) so that averages at just over 7 wins per year right? On the other hand we have Ben who, on my count has 29 wins over a 16 month period to be fair I will take his score back to one year and deduct 3 wins so by my calculations, if Ben continues on this path by the time he has been on here for 7 years he will have more that 3 times what Andrea has right now???”” By Hellon

^^ How exactly did you want those comments to be interpreted?

I do not know, why are we very angry? Hellon is and always has been the same way she is. Critical, looking for a flaw, nitpicking. She, in the true sense, is a true senior member. Melpomene called her an asset to this site, Britt always cried out when she was absent... Can you tell me why all the sudden she is such a bad person? What happened to her popularity? How come now in this minimal generation of P&Q, she is all the sudden such a destructive force and a bad person? Isn’t it because we have changed,? gotten too intolerant ? is it because a certain group, led by a certain administrator do not feel that they do need to tolerate certain members anymore? Those who craving to turn this site to a like-minded clay.
Is it too hard, nowadays (on the verge of another great war) if people have a different opinion? I guess the administration of this site must have created such an environment that encourages people to be tolerant instead of taking a side and enforcing intolerance with prejudice like Larry's post!!

I ask you, Ddavidd, quite simply: do you approve of cyber-bullying?
I want a yes or no answer. Anything else is prevarication.

I don't.

That was your answer. Though you can not dictate my response. So this is the last time I comply. out of respect

Haha, the old bully story again. Now, who has been bullied but Hellon??

I notice you did not answer Luce's questions. You merely waffled around them. So how do you interpret Hellon's postings that Luce quoted verbatim?

By the way, my immense admiration of Hellon is not marred by any occasional actions I disagree with. Don't bother to accuse me of not liking her. I adore her.

Are you asking me to answer that? Because blaming me why I did not answer a question that was addressed specifically to someone else, is absurd. The question needed Hellon to clarify what she said. If you want me to speculate, as you and Luce did, I shall be more than glad to provide you with one. Mine is way more probable than yours, I am sure. Hellon herself told me before Luce's post that she is done with that thread. I respected that. But believe me, I am dying to answer Luce.

So before we go any further I can go like this for days. But please the good members of P&Q It is an opportunity for you o practice "judging": Watch me, please. I shall be courteous, yet I am going to be accused of something. from here now, I am a "sitting duck" from now on. Please witness.

I never asked you to speculate. I asked how would YOU interpret Hellon's statements as quoted by Luce. You have given your opinion that Hellon was bullied and misinterpreted. So now is the chance to explain how Ben was not bullied but Hellon was.

Please, everyone, just stop. As I sit here now, filled to the brim with wine and frustration, just stop. Hello has said her piece, Bob and Larry, theirs, and I said mine. Let's just get on with life and writing and being adults. There is nothing fun about any of this.

Seriously?

I have never been more serious, Larry. Enough is enough. Where is this getting any of us?

Then stay out of it - avoid the drama

I would love to hear the answer to my last question to Ddavidd. In fact I invite Hellon to answer it as well.

Whatever you, I, Luce or..., says about Hellon posted is speculation with the degrees of probability. How could I assert with 100 % certainty that my take on her statement is correct? So everything off the 100%, is speculation. From all the people you were the last person I expected to ask me this question

I merely asked you how you interpret it. Not what she may have actually meant.

Okay, you give me too many chances to take advantage, like How my" interpretation" of it(what she said) could hold water if it doesn't deal with " what she may have actually meant." But too much semantic I am sorry, my fault. I want to make sure that we are on one page.
I know you want me to elaborate about my take on luce answer to Hellon. Because you think, if neither of us responded to it, we must have no answer and must have been stripped off all our logic. But sometimes the reasons, when the opponent chooses not to answer, are other than what we think and often are exactly the opposite.

Simple question.
Complicated Non-Answer

I have to leave I come back later. I apologize.

Don't worry about it. I retract the question.

Did Ben make a complaint that he thought I was bullying him?

Hi Hellon, nice to see you back. Will you now answer my questions?

I didn't fully understand your post, you seemed to be questioning yourself more than me and it appeared that you were unsure of certain things so I thought it best to let it go. However, I will try my best now...

^If you didn’t want your taste to be questioned in the first place by ANYONE, you shouldn’t have brought Ben in your comments after your “flippant hypothetical scenario”. (I really don’t remember if it was before or after that you brought him)

If you read the thread again you will see that Ben was the only one to reply to this. Many people on this site make thank you replies on their poems Ben was the only one who replied so, in my opinion he took it personally...it wasn't meant to be.

What exactly is your concern Hellon?
Is it that Ben is winning more than others?
” by Everlasting

^^^

I had already stated my concern and reiterated it....I thought the judges were not looking as far as I thought they could when picking the winners.

^^ How exactly did you want those comments to be interpreted?

^^^

While I could never predict how each person would interpret this comment the numbers were there for everyone to read.

I hope that covers everything?

Quite a bit was left out of your response, Hellon. What about this portion of Luce’s post?

““Mark...without a doubt you are very good at crunching numbers and to highlight Andrea with 1169 poems posted and 50 wins sounds really good but when I look at Ben Pickard who has only been here (rejoined I know) since Feb 2018 with 115 poems posted and 28 wins that percentage changes.

Having said that...this thread started out with a concern I have about how the judges vote so...can you run another spread sheet for that?” By Hellon

And right after that me asking,

“Hmmm, interesting

What exactly is your concern Hellon?
Is it that Ben is winning more than others?
” by Everlasting

A simple reply to my question may have helped me form a different opinion but I received no reply. Edit( or at least I didn’t see it, did you reply to me?) Then came the following comment written by you:

“OMG Mark you are amazing!!! You have taken number crunching to another level so I really thank you for the time you have taken here (I couldn't open your spread sheet link but I probably would not have understood it anyway:) What I did think I understood was that Andrea joined in 2011 so her 52 wins are spread over 8 years (I've taken it back to 7 years because she joined at the end of 2011) so that averages at just over 7 wins per year right? On the other hand we have Ben who, on my count has 29 wins over a 16 month period to be fair I will take his score back to one year and deduct 3 wins so by my calculations, if Ben continues on this path by the time he has been on here for 7 years he will have more that 3 times what Andrea has right now???”” By Hellon

^^ How exactly did you want those comments to be interpreted?”

I'm not sure I understand what I've missed Larry? You want me to reply to my own posts which Luce has quoted here or what?

EDIT

and, you never answered my question.

Hellon: “OMG Mark you are amazing!!! You have taken number crunching to another level so I really thank you for the time you have taken here (I couldn't open your spread sheet link but I probably would not have understood it anyway:) What I did think I understood was that Andrea joined in 2011 so her 52 wins are spread over 8 years (I've taken it back to 7 years because she joined at the end of 2011) so that averages at just over 7 wins per year right? On the other hand we have Ben who, on my count has 29 wins over a 16 month period to be fair I will take his score back to one year and deduct 3 wins so by my calculations, if Ben continues on this path by the time he has been on here for 7 years he will have more that 3 times what Andrea has right now???””

Lucario: “How exactly did you want those comments to be interpreted?”

My answer:: Mark came with his statistic report trying to shed light on the Hellon discussion. Here Hellon is explaining how irrelevant that statistic could be to the problem in hand. Or better she was trying to say how to look at statistic in the correct manner: Number on time, versus number alone. Here in this statement alone, I do not see any trace of Lucero’s worry. At least not bass on this paragraph. She used Ben as an extreme example. I think You guys for some weird reason ( at least to me) are too overprotective to Ben. And This did not happen only now happened a few times with other members as well.

How can there be anything unfair about who wins the weekly contest when everyone is allowed (encouraged even) to volunteer? There are no requirements. If you think you can do better than other judges, prove it! Alas, finding judges is a massive headache every term. No one wants to do it but everyone wants to say how those who do are doing it wrong. That seems so petty.

If certain poets win the weekly more often, couldn’t it be because they write better poems and/or their work appeals to more people? As far as I know, that’s how the system works. If a thousand amateur artists heap their work in with a master, the master is more likely to win the contest even if he has one piece of art submitted and there are 1,000 pieces of mediocrity submitted by others. The statistics don’t matter. This is subjectivity. If you’re not winning regularly, it might be because people don’t like your poems and not because they don’t like you.

Edit: I’m not talking to or about anyone specifically. Just adding my two pence.

Well, from my perspective:

Hellon made an inquiry, more than 100 posts were the result of a back and forth debate. Despite how relevant the replies were, I didn't see one response indicating that she took anything as personal as you guys have. Did she? If I am wrong please accept my apology.

Bob, I will be honest with you too. I don't see why you are wondering if ((is it because a certain group, led by a certain administrator do not feel that they do need to tolerate certain members anymore?)) if you are talking about so-called moderators, I think it's funny because obviously there is no admin leading no one here, the site is actually being led by every single user, which why all the changes have been made following discussions on the Main Forum, this includes how the weekly contest is being run ATM. It's being run by every single person here according to what the members have decided. I think it's clear as the sun how drastic the changes have been to the administration of the site.

The people you say are defending Ben aren't all moderators as far as I saw. I didn't defend anyone, did I? I think it would be fair to treat each member according to his individual opinion not according to what role he plays around the site.

I consider myself a friend of Hellon, I share with her bits of my personal life, and I, as far as I know, she doesn't need any lawyer. To be honest I do not like the way you stated things making it sound like there is a campaign against her and that she's being looked at like she's a bad person. I think this doesn't serve anyone. She doesn't care, she says what's on her mind and likes to receive clear answers to her questions. Whether members like it or not, we all know that about her. She doesn't mind questioning any person about anything she's unsure about. And thus, I think she doesn't mind being questioned either. It should be this way for everyone else. Just like we should all tolerate Hellon's questions, we should also tolerate the responses and replies that come afterwards.

As for Ben, he doesn't need lawyers either. Ben, you're saying enough is enough, I don't know why some of your replies, TO BE HONEST, made me feel like you made it personal in the 1st place, and that did ignite sympathy with you. Perhaps you should have kept yourself out of it from the beginning since you're not taking it that personal. I know she mentioned your name several times as an example (according to her claim) so maybe you should have believed her intentions back then, it could have helped ease the current misunderstanding; if I shall call it that. I am not out of a sudden blaming YOU, in case you're thinking about it, I am expressing my disapproval of your above statement only, asking Larry and Bob and whoever else to stop this. It's a bit contradictory. You could have stopped it way before when the 1st person came around to defend you.

Also, I don't think Hellon and who likes Hellon is the issue here Bob, I think the issue is that you men of P and Q are a bit sensitive and overthinkers. (JK)

As for Hellon's MAIN issue, I said it before, I'll say it again. I think the judges are judging the poems and not the poets, every 60 days new people are judging the weekly. I think every person has their own criteria, someone would vote because the poem moved them, others will vote because it was perhaps a perfect piece from structure to grammar to form...I don't know, they tend to state the reason in the comments. But I guess it's not for the love of the poet. However, poets who write double the number of poems written by other members will of course, logically, have higher chances of being on the front page because their production is high. I am not saying more poems mean more wins, even if they are horrible poems, the number won't make a change in this case. But If a poet who usually writes well and is always posting their work, then it does make sense for me.

Anyway, if anyone has a suggestion for how to run the weekly contest, please bring a new thread up, because anyway fewer members are showing interest in judging and there won't be any judges I predict by the end of the year. This means the site would choose the front page poems randomly, according to its own algorithm which we can't change because we do NOT have any administrator at the moment.

Rania, you must be reading different thread. The simple fact is, by mentioning my name repeatedly and not responding as to why she was doing that, she made it personal. Please, be mature enough to see a situation for what it is. And as for suggesting my responses alone 'ignited sympathy in other members is, frankly, an insult to their intelligence.
And wanting an end to an argument that is getting the site nowhere fast should never be labelled contradictory by a mod of all people. Read over the threads again and just ask yourself, honestly, what this has all been about. And please, don't come out with that nonsense about me making it personal. You are so far off Mark, it's untrue. I have barely been on the site for two weeks so this would simmer down, but it hasn't,t. And if my name would kindly stop being mentioned I will take no further part in it happily

Dear Ben, I do not act as a 'Mod' whatsoever, just because I am labeled as though, doesn't mean I do not have the right to speak up my opinion. I think you did take it personal and then when other members tried to question Hellon about calling you out, you said enough is enough and please cut off the drama. This is contradictory in my opinion. There is no insult for anyone's intelligence, it's very clear how the debate went on in the past threads. If you found insult in my reply, taking things personal again, I apologize from you, I am not attacking you, I am expressing my opinion as freely as I should as any other member.

Rania,
perhaps there is some confusion as to what constitutes 'personal'. Mention my name (and only mine) attached to a load of statistics, is personal and cannot be taken any other way. By mentioning my name and calling my acts 'contradictory' is you making it personal. I never once said you didn't have the right to an opinion, so don't try that, I simply suggested your actions were not beneficial to a site. Like it or not, you are a mod and taking up a role of responsibility requires some sort of moderation. You don't get your cake and eat it in this world.
I'll say again, anyone can see the way that thread was going and yes, I believe (openly) that I was beginning to be bullied. Other members agreed, and despite your lack of faith in them, they had the intelligence to agree without comments from me.
I am not being contradictory at all becasue I never wanted the drama to begin with. I simply want an end to end. Please stop painting me as something I am not.

So because you don't like me not acting to the norm of how you define a Mod should act you're saying my (actions were not beneficial to a site) - I don't mind! I respect your "opinion"

despite your lack of faith in them,

^ chill, you don't have to make this about me and my faith in other members.

Please stop painting me as something I am not.
^please do the same.

The simple fact is, by mentioning my name repeatedly and not responding as to why she was doing that, she made it personal.
^^^
No mate...you made it personal...like I have stated, many members leave 'thank you' comments on their poems so I was aiming at all of you who do so...I NEVER mentioned your name until you got involved and, once again, made it about you (you were the one who came forward to defend your actions) and, when I questioned your intentions and did not agree with your answers you, once again, rolled over and became the victim.

^ chill, you don't have to make this about me and my faith in other members.

^^

Surely, Rania, you are not possibly suggesting I am making this personal? Now, there really would lie an irony...

You are entirely hypocritical and I am done with this thread.

Hellon, I was not talking about the thank yous at all. Why do you keep detracting from the problem? The statistics you kept providing on win ratios were always (and only) attached to my name. That was the only point I became the victim of that thread.

You said something like 'Ben will have three times the wins Andrea has???" again, what was your point? Just answer that. You obviously knew the answer, you just hated what it meant.

Yeah well...you play the victim well is all I will add...

Okay Ben thank you for your words, and I am sorry for angering you so much with my irresponsible "actions" which was simply speaking how I saw things from my corner.