  |
 Have your say! - BJSC Edition, From your friendly neighbourhood dictatorship |
| Track this thread - Email this thread - Print this thread - Download this thread - Subscribe to this forum |
 26th April 2012, 10:45 PM
Post
#1
|
|
 Queen of Soon
Joined: 24 May 2007
Posts: 74,091 User: 3,474 
       |
I personally feel like this contest has come on leaps and bounds since the reboot. I am really proud of what we have acheived and just how well everyone took to the alterations. In the process I think we changed this contest for the better. Right now I am really loving the team we have moderating this forum. I think we all have different personalities and skills that we bring to the forum and really give us a great balance. In the unhappy event of one of my co-mods leaving us (srsly tho guys, don't you dare) one of the big things we will be looking for is maintaining a really strong balance.
HOWEVER. We are always striving for improvement and to make this more enjoyable for you so as we head towards the contests 5th birthday I'd really really like you all to have your say. What I'm looking for here is for you to: - Let us know what you like/love about BJSC - Give us constructive criticism on what you dislike - Share your idea's for helping us to continue to improve this contest - And finally give us your suggestions for things we can alter/improve I will reply to all of you and your feedback/suggestions will be taken on board and if there is something we really like the sound of it'll be discussed with a view to introducing it. Obviously changes won't happen instantly as we will have to ensure that the idea's are feasible and that implementing them really will improve the contest and it's not just something we like the idea of. For the record, the veto and rules relating to alias' will be staying. More than happy to hear suggestions about improving the veto system but it will remain in the hands of the moderators and it ain't going anywhere. Please do be honest, there are no stupid suggestions I am really interested to see people's responses to this. If we can make this really nice and positive and constructive that'd be awesome. Like I said, I really want to know what we can be doing better to make this a more enjoyable contest to participate in. |
 |
 
|
|
27th April 2012, 01:58 AM
Post
#2
|
|
 I found the love, I found the love in me
Pronouns: He/Him
Joined: 13 December 2007 Posts: 87,454 User: 5,042
       |
The only negative thing I have to say is the whole decision making thing. When you decide what's cheap and what's not. Well it's not that I'm against it, I just feel that sometimes some songs get banned/vetoed when they shouldn't really be, whilst certain other songs are getting the go ahead. (Most the ones from the mods) I think the only fair way to do it, is have a separate group of 4 respected members (I'd be willing to put myself forward - not being made mods or anything - they don't need to be) and have them decide if the mods choices are "cheap" or whatever. Because sometimes I do think there is a slight biasedness towards a mods choice.
For example, Darin 'Nobody Knows' was vetoed, but Tone Damli 'Look Back' wasn't, when her thread on this forum had more talk/hype around it. but that's the only major thing that bugs me really. Nothing else bugs me and I'm happy with the current "state" of the contest. |
|
|
|
|
27th April 2012, 03:00 AM
Post
#3
|
|
 DROTTNING!
Joined: 15 April 2006
Posts: 63,953 User: 480
           |
I think the only slight niggle I have is on the vetoing system - better than those we had before, but obviously not perfect. I think Jonjo's idea would be really good actually, but incorporated so they could evaluate whether the mods' decisions on all vetos are good or not. Obviously not to the point where they could completely overrule them, as that could lead to mob rule, but at least to the extent where concerns over veto decisions could be listened to (if not necessarily always implemented) without being dismissed completely with 'well we decided so that's what's happening'.
|
|
|
|
|
27th April 2012, 06:43 AM
Post
#4
|
|
|
I just had to see your face to feel alive
Joined: 22 February 2010
Posts: 6,910 User: 10,676
   |
I've only been here for a couple of contests but what I would like is for people to send more diverse songs from different genres. I don't think there's much you can do about that I guess but there's a dance/pop overload.. and that's certainly no good (imo)
|
|
|
|
|
27th April 2012, 09:47 AM
Post
#5
|
|
|
bye dinner
Joined: 12 February 2011
Posts: 14,102 User: 12,972
  |
Isn't the contest about sending a song you love/loved which is fairly unknown for others to discover on? Sending other genres only work if the song from another genre is also something which you adore and that you're not sending the song just because you want to do well or because to be different.
|
|
|
|
|
27th April 2012, 04:34 PM
Post
#6
|
|
|
BuzzJack Legend
Joined: 23 December 2010
Posts: 24,411 User: 12,608
  |
I think that the contest is pretty perfect as it is!
 But, if I had to suggest something it would be to somehow make the veto system better and I do like Jonjo's idea. I don't agree with Atonement's suggestion though as I don't think there is a way of implementing such an idea, but I do see where he is coming from. |
|
|
|
|
27th April 2012, 05:22 PM
Post
#7
|
|
|
Attack Dog/Sass Queen
Joined: 29 January 2008
Posts: 16,022 User: 5,342
  |
I think the contest is significantly better now from when I was here the last time. The only problem really is quite often the 'wrong semi' issue gets brought about so often some great songs don't get through the semis.
I do have a suggestion to deal with this, similar to what used to be in place at Eurovision. There would be 4 randomly selected countries to make up a 'jury' that represented a balance between pop and indie appreciators (For example, it could start off as being the 4 moderators). These countries aswell as voting from 12 to 1 would send their rankings of all the songs in both semis (for example if there were 20 songs in the semi the first placed song would be 20 points with the bottom recieving 1). The 4 lists would then be combined by the host. In the semi finals, the top 13 would automatically qualify and of the remaining songs whomever is placed highest on the jury's list would qualify aswell, without it necessarily being 14th on the leader board. This could help eliminate any unjust DNQs because of songs being placed in the wrong semi by random.org (or similar). All of this would be done without revealing to anyone other than the 4 who had been selected to be on the jury. This feels like I've rambled on a bit and I fully expect people to rip holes in this suggestion but it could be worth a try! |
|
|
|
|
27th April 2012, 06:03 PM
Post
#8
|
|
|
Sundream
Joined: 31 December 2009
Posts: 14,361 User: 10,347
   |
Firstly, I want to start off with a really positive note. That is BJSC has been incredible for me.
It sort of makes me laugh now when I think back to early 2010, visiting the BJSC forum, seeing all these different threads not understanding a single thing and not bothering to return.Then I decided to eventually join and I'm really glad I did. I love BJSC because I love music, and this is all about the ability to discover new music - music I may have never discovered anywhere else. I personally haven't had any major issues with the veto system that's currently in place. That said, I couldn't help but notice the amount of posts criticising that one track last month (was it Kerli?) was veto'd but another (Eric Saade, or Darin - they're so alike they might as well BE the same person!!!  ) wasn't.I can also tell how passionate Phil is with BJSC. This forum needs people like that - it's the reason why this contest has become so popular again compared to just before I joined in early 2011, and moreso late 2010. However, if I wanted to confirm a track by Tone Damli, would this be veto'd because it's Tone Damli - and nobody confirms Tone except Silas? This is actually the very reason why I didn't want to confirm 'I Follow Rivers' by Lykke Li last year. Even though it was quite easily one of my fave songs around at the time, Lykke Li had only won BJSC a few months earlier so I saw this as an "FSR Rontvia" act, rather than seeing it as anyone can enter any act. Because of this, I automatically thought it'd be veto'd so never bothered to confirm the track. Therefore if someone else entered a track by an act I'd already used (eg; Agnes Obel, Gotye, Kyla La Grange, etc...) I'd actually be happy to see them in the contest again. So in that respect, an act shouldn't be restricted to just one country. It shouldn't matter who enters the song if it's the song that's most important. Otherwise it's not about the music, and more about how many points your country can generate to be the BJSC #1 Country of 2012 (essentially a popularity contest). It's nice to win, but it's even nicer to discover great new music. Or maybe that's just me? 
|
|
|
|
|
27th April 2012, 06:27 PM
Post
#9
|
|
|
Attack Dog/Sass Queen
Joined: 29 January 2008
Posts: 16,022 User: 5,342
|
Anyone taking bets if Phil turns into a bit of a Mao Zedong on us all!
|
|
|
|
|
27th April 2012, 06:40 PM
Post
#10
|
|
|
Queen of Soon
Joined: 24 May 2007
Posts: 74,091 User: 3,474
|
I'll respond to everyone once I've had dinner and am feeling less pissed off thanks to work.
Imma quickly respond to one of Hit's points first though. QUOTE(Hitstastic @ Apr 27 2012, 07:03 PM)  However, if I wanted to confirm a track by Tone Damli, would this be veto'd because it's Tone Damli - and nobody confirms Tone except Silas? This is actually the very reason why I didn't want to confirm 'I Follow Rivers' by Lykke Li last year. Even though it was quite easily one of my songs around at the time, Lykke Li had only won BJSC a few months earlier so I saw this as an "FSR Rontvia" act, rather than seeing it as anyone can enter any act. Because of this, I automatically thought it'd be veto'd so never bothered to confirm the track. Therefore if someone else entered a track by an act I'd already used (eg; Agnes Obel, Gotye, Kyla La Grange, etc...) I'd actually be happy to see them in the contest again. So in that respect, an act shouldn't be restricted to just one country. It shouldn't matter who enters the song if it's the song that's most important. Otherwise it's not about the music, and more about how many points your country can generate to be the BJSC #1 Country of 2012 (essentially a popularity contest). It's nice to win, but it's even nicer to discover great new music. Or maybe that's just me? Tone Damli has been entered by both me and Jerick in the past, we've both used her twice a piece and she is the official monarch of both countries. I have not vetoed anything by one of my former representatives because they have been entered by someone else. Like this month for example, I've entered Dragonette before (I was the second person to do so way back in IV after Jonny entered I Get Around in II) and have always been so pleased to see them back. The way I've looked at it is I'm thrilled to see artists I adore and have entered back in the contest for someone else. Most of the time I haven't entered them again because for me they haven't come out with material that is above or on par with the song I entered. True Believer has this subtle beauty about it that I haven't really seen in another Dragonette song so that's why they've never returned for me but I always score them highly. When we veto tracks, around half the time if not more, we don't actually get any info on who is sending it. We have never based our decision on who has entered the song in question, it's always about the particular song itself. Very few of the recycled artists have only been recycled by the country that initially entered them. It's never really been a part of BJSC for you not to use acts that have been entered by another country. Emma Lewin was a double winner for FSR Rontvia and I considered entering her and Ramrynia actually did. I can't say I've seen this happen before, but obviously it's something we don't want to happen. As you quite rightly said it's about discovering new music, that was our main driving force in bringing in the veto as we wanted to bring the contest back to that. Basically, you can enter whoever you want as long as it doesn't break the rules (Not an ESC entry, cover of a previous BJSC entry, the same person you entered last month or someone who came top3 last month) and passes through the veto regardless of whether they have been in the contest before and who they represented. |
|
|
|
|
27th April 2012, 07:49 PM
Post
#11
|
|
|
Hello?
Joined: 8 March 2006
Posts: 83,056 User: 116
     |
BJSC is great for the most part right now, I don't personally think that the 'wrong semi' issue needs to be addressed as LexC's suggestion would cause uproar from the two countries that finished 14th and then DNQ'd despite scoring enough points to qualify. A DNQ from whichever semi is never likely to make the top ten in the final anyway, they do tend to correlate for the most part. Rae Morris came within 3 points of DNQ'ing and finished 14th in the final which is way above expectations for her semi showing, a 15th or lower place semi result converting to a top ten final result is possible but unlikely. So I personally think we can suffer the 'wrong semi' effect every now and then to forgo something destined for mid-table or bottom third in the final. Also, 4 countries acting as a 'jury' is too small a cross section of 50 odd to decide if something is a victim of the wrong semi.
My only niggle with the current format is what's already been addressed, that the mods entries aren't subject to veto, or at least have far less chance of being vetoed than everybody elses. An impartial panel of four to vote on their choices would solve that very nicely. Not saying that any of their choices in the last few months have been cheap in any way, it would just be fairer to have a completely level playing field. Other than that everything's great, I think that the four mods do a superb job of keeping things under control and keeping cheapness out, to the degree that the contest has become far more unpredictable and people can genuinely feel like they have a chance to come top five or whatever with their entry. There was nothing worse than opening the confirmation thread in the past and knowing that your amazing unknown entry would never crack the top three because three hot hyped leaks were in the line-up and primed for victory, which they inevitably often got. |
|
|
|
|
27th April 2012, 07:57 PM
Post
#12
|
|
|
Brown cow, stunning!
Joined: 7 December 2009
Posts: 67,176 User: 10,139
   |
I'm with the general opinion on veto'ing, of course the idea as a whole is the best thing to happen to BJSC frankly, but I do agree that the mods' shouldn't get chances the rest of us don't and not have the same chances at being veto'd. Tone Damli isn't the only culprit, I can think of a few more that possibly would've been veto'd had they been sent by a non-mod. But Jonjo's idea is great, you could just choose 4 different people each time, or indeed a fixed panel, who judge the mods' entries for cheapness.
Aside from the above, everything is brilliant in the contest right now and the current mod team are running things brilliantly and keeping the contest from going stale. |
|
|
|
|
27th April 2012, 07:59 PM
Post
#13
|
|
|
thanks for being a sarcy lil bitch
Joined: 25 September 2007
Posts: 79,278 User: 4,397      |
Choosing a temporary 5th judge each month (it can be a winner of the last contest actually, or if the winner is already a mod then 2nd place (
)) could make it a bit fairer.And when vetoing a song sent by one of the 'Big 5' members, this member will not participate in the process. This post has been edited by Caïn: 27th April 2012, 08:01 PM |
|
|
|
|
27th April 2012, 08:11 PM
Post
#14
|
|
|
BuzzJack Legend
Joined: 23 December 2010
Posts: 24,411 User: 12,608
|
Here is my idea for the veto situation pulling together a few ideas from above.
I think 4 more BJSC entrants (which would include the previous winner as Pavel has suggested) form a panel, possibly different each time and these could possibly check all of the entries. This panel could contain: - the winner of the previous contest (unless it is a mod then 2nd place like Pavel suggested) - a person that will be on the panel for each contest (someone "respected" like Jonjo suggested) - 2 other people who will have the time to check all the entries in a short space of time (which could be different for each contest depending on the amount of people who are able to do this). This will give a total of 8 opinions on all of the songs which should give much more consistency when deciding which entries to veto. This is because for a track to be vetoed, 5 of the 8 will have to agree on the veto. I'm not sure how these 8 will be able to communicate freely, but I'm sure they will be a way around this. Of course, this will all have to fit in during the confirmation process, but I'm sure it will be possible to do this in time if given thought to how to make the process work. This post has been edited by Ryan741: 27th April 2012, 08:12 PM |
|
|
|
|
27th April 2012, 08:36 PM
Post
#15
|
|
|
Queen of Soon
Joined: 24 May 2007
Posts: 74,091 User: 3,474
|
QUOTE(Atonement @ Apr 27 2012, 07:43 AM) I've only been here for a couple of contests but what I would like is for people to send more diverse songs from different genres. I don't think there's much you can do about that I guess but there's a dance/pop overload.. and that's certainly no good (imo) We try to encourage people to use this as a way to discover new music and forcing people to be more diverse in what they send takes away a key part of the fun. It's more fun if you get free reign to chose to send something you love regardless of the genre.Thanks for the suggestion though! |
|
|
|
|
27th April 2012, 08:44 PM
Post
#16
|
|
|
Queen of Soon
Joined: 24 May 2007
Posts: 74,091 User: 3,474
|
QUOTE(LexC @ Apr 27 2012, 06:22 PM) I think the contest is significantly better now from when I was here the last time. The only problem really is quite often the 'wrong semi' issue gets brought about so often some great songs don't get through the semis. I do have a suggestion to deal with this, similar to what used to be in place at Eurovision. There would be 4 randomly selected countries to make up a 'jury' that represented a balance between pop and indie appreciators (For example, it could start off as being the 4 moderators). These countries aswell as voting from 12 to 1 would send their rankings of all the songs in both semis (for example if there were 20 songs in the semi the first placed song would be 20 points with the bottom recieving 1). The 4 lists would then be combined by the host. In the semi finals, the top 13 would automatically qualify and of the remaining songs whomever is placed highest on the jury's list would qualify aswell, without it necessarily being 14th on the leader board. This could help eliminate any unjust DNQs because of songs being placed in the wrong semi by random.org (or similar). All of this would be done without revealing to anyone other than the 4 who had been selected to be on the jury. This feels like I've rambled on a bit and I fully expect people to rip holes in this suggestion but it could be worth a try! QUOTE(gooddelta @ Apr 27 2012, 08:49 PM) BJSC is great for the most part right now, I don't personally think that the 'wrong semi' issue needs to be addressed as LexC's suggestion would cause uproar from the two countries that finished 14th and then DNQ'd despite scoring enough points to qualify. A DNQ from whichever semi is never likely to make the top ten in the final anyway, they do tend to correlate for the most part. Rae Morris came within 3 points of DNQ'ing and finished 14th in the final which is way above expectations for her semi showing, a 15th or lower place semi result converting to a top ten final result is possible but unlikely. So I personally think we can suffer the 'wrong semi' effect every now and then to forgo something destined for mid-table or bottom third in the final. Also, 4 countries acting as a 'jury' is too small a cross section of 50 odd to decide if something is a victim of the wrong semi. Rich sums up the drawbacks to you suggestion perfectly Lexc. In theory it's a fantastic idea but the practicalities of implementing that and the downsides of that outweigh the benefits it could potentially bring. Wrong semi just doesn't happen often enough to make such a big change to the semi format. Thank you for the suggestion though! |
|
|
|
|
27th April 2012, 08:47 PM
Post
#17
|
|
|
bye dinner
Joined: 12 February 2011
Posts: 14,102 User: 12,972
|
All this suggestion about making other people have a say in the veto is a fair point. But then what role do the mods do then if other members get to participate in the veto every contest? Personally I think they veto the songs on a fair point in that it's deemed as "the next thing" and "cheap/uninspired" or that there's much hype in it, it's banned.
|
|
|
|
|
27th April 2012, 09:08 PM
Post
#18
|
|
|
Queen of Soon
Joined: 24 May 2007
Posts: 74,091 User: 3,474
|
Ok, I'm going to respond to the veto suggestions in a min. First though I want to address this Tone being cheap stuff.
Tone Damli does not have any hype on this forum or the internet in general. She has a 12 page thread in the pop forum that is two years old (was 9pages when I confirmed Look Back) covers the UK release of I Know and it's many many many delays, the release of Cocool and Looking Back. There are 5 singles in there and videos and live performances. In comparison the topic on the 1.0 reunion is 17 pages long and still without any official news on if it's actually happening or not. Tone Damli doesn't have hype she has a LOON. Me. I have made half the posts in that thread. HALF. Her official video has hit a million videos off the back of criticism of it in her native Norway. Hell they don't take her remotely seriously there. Look Back made #8 in their chart then spent a second week in the top 10 and that's IT. The track may not have been my most inspired entry but it was not something that was worthy of a veto. It would not have been vetoed if someone (literally ANYONE) else had entered it. That is the honest truth. The mods did not feel that it was something that required vetoing. Right. So Imma reply to the veto suggestion, it may appear quite a while after this post. |
|
|
|
|
27th April 2012, 10:05 PM
Post
#19
|
|
|
Queen of Soon
Joined: 24 May 2007
Posts: 74,091 User: 3,474
|
QUOTE(Jonjoria @ Apr 27 2012, 02:58 AM) The only negative thing I have to say is the whole decision making thing. When you decide what's cheap and what's not. Well it's not that I'm against it, I just feel that sometimes some songs get banned/vetoed when they shouldn't really be, whilst certain other songs are getting the go ahead. (Most the ones from the mods) I think the only fair way to do it, is have a separate group of 4 respected members (I'd be willing to put myself forward - not being made mods or anything - they don't need to be) and have them decide if the mods choices are "cheap" or whatever. Because sometimes I do think there is a slight biasedness towards a mods choice. For example, Darin 'Nobody Knows' was vetoed, but Tone Damli 'Look Back' wasn't, when her thread on this forum had more talk/hype around it. but that's the only major thing that bugs me really. Nothing else bugs me and I'm happy with the current "state" of the contest. QUOTE(Messiah @ Apr 27 2012, 04:00 AM) I think the only slight niggle I have is on the vetoing system - better than those we had before, but obviously not perfect. I think Jonjo's idea would be really good actually, but incorporated so they could evaluate whether the mods' decisions on all vetos are good or not. Obviously not to the point where they could completely overrule them, as that could lead to mob rule, but at least to the extent where concerns over veto decisions could be listened to (if not necessarily always implemented) without being dismissed completely with 'well we decided so that's what's happening'. QUOTE(Ryan741 @ Apr 27 2012, 05:34 PM) I think that the contest is pretty perfect as it is! But, if I had to suggest something it would be to somehow make the veto system better and I do like Jonjo's idea. I don't agree with Atonement's suggestion though as I don't think there is a way of implementing such an idea, but I do see where he is coming from. QUOTE(gooddelta @ Apr 27 2012, 08:49 PM) BJSC is great for the most part right now, I don't personally think that the 'wrong semi' issue needs to be addressed as LexC's suggestion would cause uproar from the two countries that finished 14th and then DNQ'd despite scoring enough points to qualify. A DNQ from whichever semi is never likely to make the top ten in the final anyway, they do tend to correlate for the most part. Rae Morris came within 3 points of DNQ'ing and finished 14th in the final which is way above expectations for her semi showing, a 15th or lower place semi result converting to a top ten final result is possible but unlikely. So I personally think we can suffer the 'wrong semi' effect every now and then to forgo something destined for mid-table or bottom third in the final. Also, 4 countries acting as a 'jury' is too small a cross section of 50 odd to decide if something is a victim of the wrong semi. My only niggle with the current format is what's already been addressed, that the mods entries aren't subject to veto, or at least have far less chance of being vetoed than everybody elses. An impartial panel of four to vote on their choices would solve that very nicely. Not saying that any of their choices in the last few months have been cheap in any way, it would just be fairer to have a completely level playing field. Other than that everything's great, I think that the four mods do a superb job of keeping things under control and keeping cheapness out, to the degree that the contest has become far more unpredictable and people can genuinely feel like they have a chance to come top five or whatever with their entry. There was nothing worse than opening the confirmation thread in the past and knowing that your amazing unknown entry would never crack the top three because three hot hyped leaks were in the line-up and primed for victory, which they inevitably often got. QUOTE(Liаm @ Apr 27 2012, 08:57 PM) I'm with the general opinion on veto'ing, of course the idea as a whole is the best thing to happen to BJSC frankly, but I do agree that the mods' shouldn't get chances the rest of us don't and not have the same chances at being veto'd. Tone Damli isn't the only culprit, I can think of a few more that possibly would've been veto'd had they been sent by a non-mod. But Jonjo's idea is great, you could just choose 4 different people each time, or indeed a fixed panel, who judge the mods' entries for cheapness. Aside from the above, everything is brilliant in the contest right now and the current mod team are running things brilliantly and keeping the contest from going stale. Right. Here goes nothing.... I really dislike this accusation that we don't apply the veto to our own entries. That has NEVER happened. As I said in my reply to hits, a lot of the time we don't actually get country information with the confirmation list and it's a bit hard to favour our own entries if we don't know what the others have entered now isn't it.  The original reason that the moderators were put in charge of the veto was because we are the group that are deemed responsible enough to act with the best interest of this contest in mind.Now I understand that there have been recent concerns about what has been vetoed. We admit that we may not get it right 100% of the time but we do act with the intention of making this contest better and with it's best interests at hearts. We have always applied the same scrutiny to every entry regardless of who entered it and that is what we will continue to do so. We are discussing your concerns and I would really like to change and improve the appeal process so that if you think your song was unfairly vetoed it is easier to appeal against that decision. I really want you not to feel that your song was wrongly kicked out. I think we can improve the transparency of the veto process also. We're gonna look into fully explaining our reasons for vetoing entries and really looking into how we decide what to and what not to veto. We are going to work hard to make the process as fair as it can be. Now, as for this suggestion about a jury for checking our entries. It's certainly something we will investigate the practicalities of. I am still highly offended by the accusation of favouring our own entries. I put this system together and it has never been abused and will never be abused. The GM's and Admin's can vouch for that. As offended and angry as I am, we are going to discuss what we can do to remove this suspicion of the moderators. |
|
|
|
|
27th April 2012, 10:16 PM
Post
#20
|
|
|
Hello?
Joined: 8 March 2006
Posts: 83,056 User: 116
|
QUOTE(Silas @ Apr 27 2012, 11:05 PM) Now, as for this suggestion about a jury for checking our entries. It's certainly something we will investigate the practicalities of. I am still highly offended by the accusation of favouring our own entries. I put this system together and it has never been abused and will never be abused. The GM's and Admin's can vouch for that. As offended and angry as I am, we are going to discuss what we can do to remove this suspicion of the moderators. I can only speak for myself and not others that raised the issue but it's honestly not 'suspicion of the moderators' or any sort of mass revolt, it's just a suggestion to make it a more level playing field so that EVERY entry is 'examined' by four people, as opposed to three (a mod wouldn't veto their own entry after all!). For the record, for various reasons I'd have vetoed a couple of the mods entries since this process came into place, but I'm not going to say which they are - however, Look Back wasn't one of them! |
|
|
|
|
| Time is now: 27th April 2024, 09:40 AM |
Copyright © 2006 - 2024 BuzzJack.com
About | Contact | Advertise | Privacy Policy | Terms of Service
