Judging the Weekly Contest

Hi all! The mod squad has been discussing different ideas for stimulating judge participation in the weekly contest. We'd love your input, and we're all ears (eyes) if you have other ideas. As it stands, we have been struggling to find and retain judges each term.

Currently, we require judges to provide a comment with each vote. If we lifted this requirement, judges would be able to vote without providing comments. Would this stimulate greater participation or not? What would be the pros and cons of doing away with this requirement?

Also, what is your understanding of our current standards for who may judge the weekly contest? Should we have standards to abide by, such as age or maturity restrictions? Why or why not?

Thank you for your help! We look to our members for insight and guidance in potential site changes like this :)

I mentioned it in the other thread, but I think making comments optional, and inviting everyone to judge would open up more participation. If I also remember correctly, if someone gets promoted to a judge, they also would have nominating powers that they might not have had before, I think that too would be a bonus, since I personally feel iffy about laxing the criteria for a praised comment (which I think is probably the fastest way to get that power). My thinking is that, since the site's already low on activity, instead of making comments mandatory/making the comments needed more strict, being more lax might persuade people to vote more, which means they'd have to read more and maybe comment more as well. If there's ever a week without judges, as in there's a panel of 10 or however many judges and there's just no votes, than so be it.

Bumping this!

I think the judging process is was good but it can be very time consuming. I spent 2 terms as one and although I was humbled by the process. It's tiring.

I may do it again soon and may enlist the help of my daughter. She's smarter than I.

Hi all.

I hope everyone is as well as can be.

I would just like to add to this thread about the weekly competition.

There was a time when PnQ thrived each and every week with 5 judges, which became more and more difficult to sustain over time, which generally means a ‘change’ of direction.

I know that the Moderators over time have almost pleaded for judges to come forward and at least one mostly has – even if it is one and I salute that one judge.

Also the Moderators have their hands tied due to being unable to ‘alter; the status of how the site works in regard to the competition. So difficult all round! And again I tip my hat to them for keeping the site what it is.

I would be lying if I said I haven’t ben a judge on many occasions. I am a very personal chap and have always kept it close to my chest, and never revealed myself (until I slipped up haha).
I agree with CJ to a point that if you are the ‘only’ judge or maybe one of two, it can become tiresome as there is no back-up if this makes sense

There is no doubt since I have been a member now for many years, that the weekly competition plays a large role on PnQ aside how great this site is for many reasons.

Its clear that poets read each others work. Some leave comments, some tick the ‘like’ button and some may read without leaving anything (unsure perhaps?). I must say not as yet I have come across someone picking ‘dislike’ for one I feel its unfair not to use a word such as ‘dislike’ any writers work, but its an unworthy word to use, so to speak I don’t mean that in a ‘negative’ way, I personally have never felt it fits a purpose. I would say if anyone reads a poem and doesn’t like it for their reasons, they more than likely will not leave anything, rather than select ‘dislike’

Okay and this is only a suggestion and example:

If I an every other poet only read four poems a week.
Now out of those four they pick two of their choice that they would more than likely ‘nominate’ for the weekly competition.
However if all the poems we read each week (ranging from one to any amount), and leave no comments or tick ‘like’ or very rarely (I would say ‘dislike’) and pick two of your choice, one being a ‘win’ and one a ‘HM’ in their thoughts, send a PM to the moderators with the two poems they choose along with a comment for the ‘win’ and also a comment for the ‘HM.’

Not only does this open it up hugely for all poets, but its also about diversity and other poets being involved consistently, but also (which I feel important at this moment) judges are no longer required, which also relieves the stress for the moderators and pressure to find judges. Maybe?

So just to recap – you read a minimum of two poems. One you feel for a ‘W’ one for a ‘HM’ send both poems PM to the Moderators. Its up to the poet how much in the way of comments they want to put in each, but as simple as this:

My PM to the Mods -

Poem 1. ‘Win’ - ‘I love the sky’ by. ?? such a beautiful poem, that touched my heart.

Poem 2 ‘HM’ - ‘Winter time’ by. ?? A lovely scene captured.

Surely we can all manage this in some way? Also it brings more poetry to the competition table, more reading, diversity, inspiration and also brings a lot o the poems nominated to the table, that slip under the radar.

If four poets end up with the same amount of 'wins' then they share the win glory, as much as the 'HMs' i am sure we can do a weekly competition through a thread, rather than keep to something that isnt changing/

Obviously the ‘BIG’ question is whether this can work through the moderators, thinking of their time and commitments.

I hope this makes sense, but this is a thread so lets discuss it. If it doesn’t work at least we tried.

I rest my case your Honour. Mx

Michael, always good to see you on here! You have some awesome ideas and the "your Honour" at the bottom made me laugh!

So, please correct me if I'm misunderstanding (because I very well could be), this would open it up to members without a need for any kind of judging status. To my knowledge though, will have to ask other mods, that hasn't been a big barrier we've come across. I think if we did have a handful of newer people who messaged us and who suddenly wanted to judge, and who hadn't met the criteria yet with the praised comments, we would then talk about where to go from there.

I feel like in the past year, we've had a decent number of poems on the nominations list, with good variety. There have been a few weeks where's it been a rather shorter list, or half a dozen, but if I recall correctly, there are quite a few consistent weeks where there are a dozen or so poems to choose from. I usually make Friday night my PnQ night to read poems posted over the week and see if anything strikes me to nominate for the weekly. There have been times where there's been a poet posting multiple poems, so I try to make sure that I read ALL of their latest and see if one particularly stands out or connect with me more.

I feel like the nomination list makes the process of judging more mainstream and easy to access, and I've often seen some members utilize their three nominations too so we have that input from poets that week who have been actively reading. I guess my question with the method you present is, do you mean members can choose one poem they see as a "win" and one poem as an "HM" from the nomination list? Then send to the judges and have it be a tally? I feel like we may or may not get more input that way. If it would be more of a casual and open thing for more members to just pm the mods what poems they see, but I also feel like there would be less accountability and interest to read through ALL nominated poems, and to choose and narrow from what's highlighted.

Like, if a few members see a poem that's been posted this week and it really moves them... they might instantly want that as a "win" and message the mods. Instead of that poem being nominated most likely, and the judge being more critical and going through the list of nominated poems. Would it be more of an impulse thing instead of more careful consideration of poems? I don't see this as necessarily providing more variety of poems, just more possible member input, but without the structure and requirements we usually hold for a judge to encourage them to read through the pieces and discern what they consider the best to them. I know you mention the minimum of two poems, but what if a poet ONLY reads a few poems and makes a decision based off of that limited number? Instead of reading everything presented on the nomination list?

Just some thoughts, looking forward to discussing! And please, correct me if I'm not understanding properly or something. Only on my first cup of coffee and it's getting to be the late afternoon :P

I was also thinking maybe on saturday morning, a google form can be posted weekly and people can vote on the poems there? that way it's open to everyone who wants to judge, it'd be easier to see the results, and collate the comments if there are any?

i'm sure i could whip something up to automate the making the form process so it's easier. we could also ask people to be signed into a google account (it won't share your email for the record) or in lieu of that ask them to link back to their profile, but that way it'll prevent bad actors from making multiple votes.

Edit: I believe keeping the nominations would help streamline the process like MA said, but if I'm not mistaken, anyone can be promoted to a judge, and if you're a judge, you're granted the ability to nominate poems, if you didn't have that power before, which is why I was thinking earlier that the mods just promote anyone who would be interested in judging and be more lax about it, i'm sure people would be more likely to engage in voting and stuff if they felt like it was optional and not a chore. and if there's ever a week where all the judges didn't vote, then so be it lol

Hi MA :)

I think i had too much coffee haha..

Lets hope more poets come forward to judge the weekly competition. I was overthinking as i can do at times!

When i looked at what i had written, i feel it would be difficult to work in a way i thought.

So lets all be hopeful

I really hate the dislike button.

I don't actually care for my own part. However some people write their innermost fears and stuff on here. To click dislike seems like making it even worse.

I can't condone that.

Sorry if I went off tangent a little with this

Regards to all

Craig

I hate it too. Fortunately I think no one can see if you dislike their poem. It was meant to be part of an algorithm so that we would be able to tailor the type of poems advertised to us, but I don't know if Janis implemented that feature or not. Either way, it seems like a pointless and somewhat negative element of this site (being able to "dislike" poems).