In the current competition 'Pure Filth' I noticed that once submissions were closed and the voting could be shown, my entry 'Cold Shock' has 23 '5' votes and i '2'. Of course, everybody has their own criteria for voting, but I think that, since the vote average is taken into account for judging (bringing into play the 'popularity contest' factor, rather than solely judging entries based on the words on the page), that competitors shouldn't be allowed to vote on each other, lest an unscrupulous competitor should try to weaken an opponents standing.
Maybe I'm out of line, but I am curious as to how others feel about this.
This is all extremely interesting information. But can this process be documented as a sticky on a forum or added to all the competitions that you run in future. If I read and like someone else's entry, I normally give a good mark, why else would I read it all the way through otherwise. Do people who give good scores get a mental tick against their names lol?
At what point are the other contestants votes removed before the required 10 or after?
Also, what happens if all the people that voted for you are competitors themselves. What score do you get then? A zero?
And the final judging, is that done by a panel or is it based on the scores alone? Sorry this seems to be answered above.
I've never been clear as to what the process is, but describing it would be enormously helpful to everyone.
Really interested to know how it all works.
I used to be a pervert. In here, I'm normal!
Watch this space...She is really - cumming soon!
If I read a competitor's piece, and I choose to vote, I vote honestly. I would never sandbag a competitor and I would hope that my fellow competitors would treat me the same way. There have been some amazing comp pieces that once I read them, I knew I had read the winner. However, knowing that in the realm of the comps, votes from my fellow competitors aren't counted for or against me does help. I think for most of us, it's just the earning the minimum 10 that we mostly worry about. Besides, I've seen some winners of comps not get all 5's and I would trust those lower scores were from those not in the comps (at least, that's what I'd like to hope for anyway.)
In the end, the judges have the most difficult job in picking the winners and it's rarely if ever an easy job. These judges never get enough respect for all their hard work, including Nicola.
I'm no expert on this topic, and not really a good writer either.
But I don't think the Comments or Votes should count at all in determining who wins a competition.
The quality of the story or poem should be the only deciding factor I think.
As an example:
In this past Passion Competition?
I had by a far number the most Comments(126) and Votes(129) on my poem entry then anyone else,
with an average scoring of 4.94 when the competition ended I think.
I didn't even make the top 15 though. So I really thought that Comments and Voting didn't matter anyway.
I had a lot of competitor entries who Commented and Voted on my poem.
Maybe that's where I got the few 3's and 4's scored? I not know, and not important to me really.
I was very happy so many welcomed me in the competition and in writing for my first time ever.
It was fun and I'm glad so many liked my poem.
With so many wonderful writers here? I would have been completely surprised if I had won anything...smile
I'm not going to quote anyone in particular, but thank you to all respondents - I've certainly had more answered than the question I asked, and I think it's a great way to evaluate the entries in the contest. The way I'm seeing things from the excellent input is that the voting would be a simple qualifying round (it's like 'You have to be this tall to go on this ride'), then once as much 'ballot box stuffing' as possible is eliminated, the remainders go on to the stage where the criteria consists of the 'pure factors': writing/story/plot/innovation/character and all the subcategories of parsing, grammar, syntax and 'polish'.
It's a very pragmatic way to do it - it keeps more of a burden off of the mods and anyone else in the trenches, because they ARE all volunteers, and as so, taxing their time unnecessarily would show a disregard for their time and efforts, which I agree should be applauded.
Great analogy latecomer, spot on.
