|
|
Post by MG on Jul 14, 2017 23:36:16 GMT 1
No they shouldn't, because imo being admin shouldn't make you feel more "superior" than other users. Also the wildcard system is bad exactly for the same reason, that the admins are chosing it. Admin or not, if you're not fast enough to confirm, you should go to PQR like any other user imo. Without Mimis and me this contest wouldn't exist, my dear, so i guess i should have the right to participate. but let's agree to disagree  Maybe a bit more respect would be nice, and not criticizing everything we do. otherwise i might stop this contest really soon  Let me give you an example, in NVSC, admins are also competing in the PQR, and they aren't "secured" from this just because they are part of council. Rules should be equal for everyone. And if you're admin of the contest then it's obvious that you'll confirm among first users without having the "reserved spot". |
|
|
|
Post by Maxim on Jul 15, 2017 0:02:36 GMT 1
tbh I don't really agree with the current PQR rules but I will keep participating even if they won't be changed. I think that the following 2 suggestions could be better for the contest: 1. A PQR which includes the countries finishing in the bottom of the semi seems the fairest option to me. If a country tends to finish in the bottom should really try harder and the PQR would help that. Plus, it seems more fair to me that users which are doing bad in the contest will be in PQR than users which are not active 24/7, after all, it's a song contest, not the fastest user to secure a spot contest. For example, in the day of the confirmations for #54 I faced the biggest tragedy I had to face in my whole life, therefore I wasn't fast enough to secure a spot for  Ukraine and went to PQR, if I would send another song I would probably fail in PQR and stayed out of the edition just because of that tragedy, which would really piss me off and everyone would agree that it's not fair at all. I noticed that in every edition the semi's become weaker, and I think that the reason for that is lack of research and that people are sending the first songs which comes to their mind without even thinking how good it will do in the contest, a PQR which includes the countries doing the worst would boost some users to make a bit more research and send songs which are good not only in their opinions which will lead to a way stronger and enjoyable competition. 2. Finalists/Top 15/Top 10 have their places secured for the following edition. I think that users which finish high, and not only the top 3 should have their places secured, it will be sort of a compromise between those who demand a PQR for the bottom placed countries and those who think that the current way should not change. As I said, I will continue participating in any way, but I really think that the current PQR rules are really unfair and should change. Couldn't disagree more tbh. I find the current way more fair. It's not like the same countries are stuck in PQR or anything, which I think would be the case with the system you described. Even the countries who fail to qualify from the PQR with some activity have a spot secured in the next edition. Trying to get "more quality" is subjective. And mentioned system is pushing countries with smaller music industries out of the contest or at least out of the semis. Also rather promoting "send something that will do good over what you prefer". My opinion anway. I understand something bad can happen during or just before the submissions and in such cases online song contest should be your last worry. I guess no one can come up with a system that 50+ people like/agree with. But if it's too far away from person's liking, they can simply not participate. You think it's fair that if you can't be active for a day or a bit more you are sent to PQR no matter how good your results are? Imo it isn't at all I dislike the idea of PQR in general, but if a contest can't handle a too big amount of participants, there is no other way too handle it, and if so, then it would be way more fair if someone would "deserve" a PQR by finishing in the bottom of the SF then by not being on the forums 24/7 and so on. You can take a look in the NVSC PQR's and see both countries with huge and with smaller music industries there, if someone makes enough research, he can find a song which he likes and which can avoid PQR. I am not trying to sound rude, but I really think the council should re-consider the PQR format and maybe even make a poll to see what most of the participants think should be. |
|
|
|
Post by ferrygraf on Jul 15, 2017 0:05:46 GMT 1
*sigh* if we only had so many comments about the music than many pages of discussions about rules of overall rather little relevance... I'll just say: 54 people applied/showed interest in the last edition, 51 of them could compete. the other 3 had a chance to be directly qualified for the next one (by the RoW jury), so they won't have to go through it again for now. 48 people were directly in, only 2 of them were the admins who usually decide their entry fast enough anyway and would definitely if they weren't reserved. so a rule change there would be symbolic at maximum and as it affects only 2 spots it's almost irrelevant... from the semifinals 21 countries qualify directly, 9 qualify to the Second Chance Round, and just 1 from the remaining 18 gets a wildcard from us. this isn't about feeling superior, it's more to have a nice number of 10 countries we can work better with and possibly to give a chance to recently less successful countries. we even gave 2 wildcards in the past, so we reduced our "power" here if you wanna call it like that. i agree this is a thing that might be redundant, but i don't see why we absolutely need to get rid of it either. NVSC have their rules, we have ours. seeing the popularity of the contests (1st and 3rd most posts of the forums) both seem to work in their way and in their concept. no need to compare imo, each one is different and has their ideas... no concept is perfect for everyone... i think i said all i wanted to say  |
|
|
|
Post by Laurinda on Jul 15, 2017 0:07:57 GMT 1
Couldn't disagree more tbh. I find the current way more fair. It's not like the same countries are stuck in PQR or anything, which I think would be the case with the system you described. Even the countries who fail to qualify from the PQR with some activity have a spot secured in the next edition. Trying to get "more quality" is subjective. And mentioned system is pushing countries with smaller music industries out of the contest or at least out of the semis. Also rather promoting "send something that will do good over what you prefer". My opinion anway. I understand something bad can happen during or just before the submissions and in such cases online song contest should be your last worry. I guess no one can come up with a system that 50+ people like/agree with. But if it's too far away from person's liking, they can simply not participate. You think it's fair that if you can't be active for a day or a bit more you are sent to PQR no matter how good your results are? Imo it isn't at all I dislike the idea of PQR in general, but if a contest can't handle a too big amount of participants, there is no other way too handle it, and if so, then it would be way more fair if someone would "deserve" a PQR by finishing in the bottom of the SF then by not being on the forums 24/7 and so on. You can take a look in the NVSC PQR's and see both countries with huge and with smaller music industries there, if someone makes enough research, he can find a song which he likes and which can avoid PQR. I am not trying to sound rude, but I really think the council should re-consider the PQR format and maybe even make a poll to see what most of the participants think should be. It's not like you have to be on 24/7  submissions are once a month-ish ... I didn't try to make you agree with me as obvs that's not happening, I just expressed how I feel as it looked like no one agrees with the system. And I'm sure not 100% of other contest are meant to be exactly like NVSC. |
|
|
|
Post by Maxim on Jul 15, 2017 0:15:58 GMT 1
You think it's fair that if you can't be active for a day or a bit more you are sent to PQR no matter how good your results are? Imo it isn't at all I dislike the idea of PQR in general, but if a contest can't handle a too big amount of participants, there is no other way too handle it, and if so, then it would be way more fair if someone would "deserve" a PQR by finishing in the bottom of the SF then by not being on the forums 24/7 and so on. You can take a look in the NVSC PQR's and see both countries with huge and with smaller music industries there, if someone makes enough research, he can find a song which he likes and which can avoid PQR. I am not trying to sound rude, but I really think the council should re-consider the PQR format and maybe even make a poll to see what most of the participants think should be. It's not like you have to be on 24/7 submissions are once a month-ish ... I didn't try to make you agree with me as obvs that's not happening, I just expressed how I feel as it looked like no one agrees with the system. And I'm sure not 100% of other contest are meant to be exactly like NVSC. The reason I mentioned NVSC is that it's the only contest in the forums which has a PQR, nothing else. I like both formats and the thing I disagree on in WWWSC is the PQR and I brought the NVSC PQR as an example for the fairest PQR format imo. |
|
3,977
11,267
WWW Song Contest Manager
|
Post by mimisthesc on Jul 15, 2017 0:19:19 GMT 1
Alright, let's make a few things clear. First of all, the Pre-Qualification Round System is something that we introduced because some people missed their spots as they were not fast enough. At least now, they stand a chance of qualifying from the Pre-Qualification Round. However I never expected to have a contest in which all the rules would be well liked or appreciated by every single user, so I guess it's anyway a 'trivial' issue after all. Secondly, Maxim I think that the best thing to do is not to keep on waiting for the last minute to find your entry. You have a whole edition beforehand, you listen to songs on the radio, you surely go through many youtube videos daily and a little bit of research doesn't hurt. Moreover, we give you usually a day or even more time until we open the submissions for the edition to follow, in which you could obviously find something good. So in my personal opinion, this "not competitive songs/songs sent in a rush" isn't a valid statement. Third of all, MG if you really think managers shouldn't have their spots secured, then that's like a huge disrespect towards me and ferrygraf . Just for your information, I spend so much time making those f***ing designs, making recaps, results presentations and videos, I download the mp3 files of the songs and Florian also does the same (he makes the results video in stead of working on the design). This is something we do because we want to give you something good and have fun and we don't even get paid for it. If I counted the hours I have spent working for this contest, I might have "lost" more than a whole year of my life, during which I could be doing something more creative for myself. Instead I am here, doing all this stuff, with my only reward being my participation in this contest. We have never been able to give a wildcard to ourselves, we never manipulated any results and we've always accepted things as they were, even if we didn't like them. The only "bonus" you could actually say that we have is that we know the results from before (just like every contest manager anyway) and that we get to pick 1 wildcard for the 2nd Chance Round (just reminding you it used to be 2 wildcards back when we had 2 semi finals, so we've even lessened our "power" there). After having thought of all this, let me know if you still think we shouldn't have a reserved spot. If you still think the same then I guess you're just ungrateful. Oh and please do not compare us with NVSC or any other contest. Every contest is unique and has its own rules. Of course we can get inspired by some other contests and adapt some of their features but we accept them as they are and I personally appreciate all the hard work ever admin has to do, as I am also doing the same things. With all this having been said, I want to let people reading this know that the Pre-Qualification System will remain. There will be a small change which we will announce very soon that won't be applied for the submissions of the next edition and which had already been decided before all this drama popped up. |
|
|
|
Post by MG on Jul 15, 2017 0:33:52 GMT 1
Triggered
|
|
|
|
Post by ferrygraf on Jul 15, 2017 0:39:31 GMT 1
that's all you say after Mimis' long post? kinda lame tbh |
|
|
|
Post by Anesović on Jul 15, 2017 0:41:49 GMT 1
I find it funny when some people complain about the new rules, but then some actually decided to use those rules to their advantage  I smell hypocrisyHonestly, if you guys actually want some changes, y'all need to think of something that actually works, and that doesn't sound like you're just comparing two contests by this point. The only thing I would think of is increase the amount of participants in the semis from 16/17 to atleast 19/20. Yes, a lot of countries in the semis, but at least people aren't gonna start complaining, and the PQR that many people apparently fear now, instead of just staying away for one edition, will be gone. Whether Mimis & Florian would like to actually make semis with around 19/20 entrants is up to them, but that's the only thing I could think of, and I would still not complain if they didn't include this. And then again, if you guys are against some of the rules, there isn't anything saying that you guys could just not participate at all |
|
|
|
Post by MG on Jul 15, 2017 0:43:37 GMT 1
that's all you say after Mimis' long post? kinda lame tbh The issue is not even the secured spots of the admins, as it's obvious that they would be fast to confirm in their own contest (?). It just escalated quickly because all that we are trying to point out is how unfair in our opinion the PQR and the RoW system is. Yes those 2 secured admins place are rather symbolic but they are not even needed as the admins are obviously going to participate unless some of them isn't able to. |
|
NVSC • 
FC • 
OESC • 
OASC • 
OAmSC • 
OAfSC • 
OUSC • 
EoF • 
FMC 
