RE: Ban List,

 

I would suggest that the mods post a starter list directly after final results with a poll so people can vote on the mod's suggestions for the ban list. If a certain % of voters agree that song x should be banned, then it'll make the final list. Any suggestions for songs that the mods have missed out can be posted within the thread and if enough people agree with the suggestion then it'll be put onto the list.

 

That way everything that makes the final list has been put their democratically and there can be no accusations of power abuse. Which everyone seems to love crying here the moment one of us even sneezes :rolleyes:

RE: AF Rule - Extension

 

I propose the following amendment to my original proposal to ban all current era album tracks of all AF's:

 

Extend the AF ban to cover all singles not just the first two from an era, and impose a ban of 2months on album tracks. For example; Sweet 7 is released on March 8th, all the tracks on it would be ineligible for entry until May 8th. After May 8th only the singles would remain ineligible for entry. The theory behind this is, some album tracks may be discovered via the contest, but Singles 90% of the time aren't. [Very few people would have first heard Push The Button or Hole In The Head through my I and V entries]

RE: DSQ Proposal

 

All songs on the Radio 1 A or B list and in the iTunes top40 at the start of confirmation are ineligible for entry. These song's aren't discoveries or inspired choices. I know that this isn't always the case for our international members, but statistically there are more UK-Based members of BJSC. No songs would be disqualified during the course of the contest if they at any point entered one of these lists. However a % deduction in votes would be made on the following basis:

 

Radio 1 A list: 5% Deduction

Radio 1 B List: 2.5% Deduction

iTunes #1: 25% Deduction

iTunes Top3: 15% Deduction

iTunes #4 & #5: 12.5% Deduction

iTunes #6 - #10: 10% Deduction

iTunes #11 - #15: 7.5% Deduction

iTunes #15 - #20: 5% Deduction

iTunes #21 - #30: 2.5% Deduction

iTunes #31 - #40: 1% Deduction

 

Penalty would be applied at both SF and Final stage. The iTunes position would be determined by its average position over the 48hours prior to the closing of voting as determined by this thread

 

Example: If entry X was placed on the Radio 1 B list during the Semi's the song would incur a 2.5% reduction in it's score. If it moved up to the A list during the final week it would have 5% deducted from it's final score.

 

If entry Y was on the Radio 1 A list during the Semi's it would get a 5% reduction. If it was released at the start of Finals week and it's average position on the iTunes chart for the 48hours prior to the closing of the voting was #16 it would get a 5% reduction. If entry Y was still on the Radio 1 A-List during finals week it would receive a further 5% reduction making it's total penalty for the finals 10%

 

I like your suggestions r.e. the banlist and AF, seems fair

 

I don't think any song should ever have votes taken off it at the results stages - who can tell what will pop up randomly in the iTunes top 40, I could send some unknown to most European hit and it could suddenly appear on iTunes, be played in an advert and take off without me having known this was going to happen

I'm confused. I thought this extra system was to weed out the cheap entries? And then reservations would go on as planned. Thus, by your logic, it gives people two opportunities to block artists / songs based on personal vendettas / what they consider cheap.

 

Fair point, I hadn't considered that. Like I said, I'm only suggesting things - what will end up happening will probably be a combination of a lot of different people's suggestions so I at least wanted to get it out there. There's always that risk there with the artist reservation thread, it's always been first come first served, you'd have to have one hell of a vendetta against somebody to turn up on the dot to block their entry :( has anyone even ever done this in the past anyway? I know we've had cheap blocking but I don't recall people actually blocking something just because they have a problem with somebody else.

I like your suggestions r.e. the banlist and AF, seems fair

 

I don't think any song should ever have votes taken off it at the results stages - who can tell what will pop up randomly in the iTunes top 40, I could send some unknown to most European hit and it could suddenly appear on iTunes, be played in an advert and take off without me having known this was going to happen

Agreed completely. It's the DSQ rule that I have the most problem with. I don't think anything should get DSQ'd. Ever (unless something SERIOUS happens i.e. the whole Liam thing). It's just not fair at all.

Reading this thread from start to finish brings to mind this US#1 hit (but UK Flop) from the 1970s:

 

 

 

But seriously from what I've seen three (or is it four) suggestions have been provided within this thread.

 

Clearly none of them are going to be unanimously approved, but is anything going to happen to move things forward to get a majority consensus of some sort or are we going to settle for the same flawed system that we have currently?

 

 

from what I could work out, you send the name of the entry that you want to send to the host - this is not a confirmation merely a registration of interest - if the same song comes up 1 or 2 more times (if obviously cheap) or 3 or 4 more times (if not so cheap), it instantly gets put onto the banlist

 

Thinking about it properly, it could all be a bit confusing...

 

How about this as an alternative proposal; artist reservation/confirmation stays exactly the same as it always has done, but to construct the monthly banlist each contestant PM's the name of TWO songs and artists to the host, that we feel are too cheap for the contest/don't warrant being there - any song that gets 3 or more nominations is put onto the banlist, along with the usual top 3 from last month...if there are no songs that get 3 nominations they can't have been all that cheap in the first place and no extra banlist is needed. This way, nobody is stepping on any toes, it's still first come first served as soon as the artist reservation thread opens, the mods don't have the extra power to decide the banlist - it's a democratic vote from all contestants which helps to weed out the cheap and uninspired and it shuts up the people who complain about the cheap winners as obviously nobody else would have seen them as cheap if they were alone in nominating it for the banlist. Leave this process open for maybe 3 days after which the host announces which songs have made the banlist and simultaneously opens the artist reservation thread - also this way we would always have at least a 3 day gap as such between contests rather than rushing out of one and straight into another. So the ONLY different thing about BJSC would be the 3 day democratic construction of a banlist - everything else would remain the same, yet it would stop the uber-cheap entries.

PERFECTION. We have a compromise I feel! :wub:

I really like Rich's idea! Very well thought out, it's precise and isn't exactly hard to keep track of.

I love Rich's idea (gooddelta not me talking in the 3rd person :lol:) as well as it is very straightforward and fair.

 

Anyway I'm in love with a song that has just escaped this evening that trumps On A Mission all ways....

 

"Oh oh oh, I got a rocket Oh oh oh, you're going on it

Oh oh oh You're never coming back ......."

 

:wub: :wub: :wub:

 

 

Has it fully leaked or is it just the clip?! :o I (just) listened to the clip of it on youtube, and it sounds alright, I wanna hear the full thing before I make judgement though!

I'm so confused. :(

Has it fully leaked or is it just the clip?! :o I (just) listened to the clip of it on youtube, and it sounds alright, I wanna hear the full thing before I make judgement though!

It's out in Australia now.

 

Not that it'd make it through any proposed cheap guidelines...

I still prefer On A Mission

I too think Rich's idea is the best (gooddelta). It doesn't add any extra time to the contest, isn't overly complicated, it's democratic, and doesn't put too many limits on what can be sent. I think it should succeed in getting rid of the main "cheap" culprits each month, and yes while people could still enter really big hits if they wanted under this system (the type nobody would even think to try and ban), they are the type of songs that I'd like to hope 90% of participants wouldn't think of sending, and certainly alot of people would be against voting for anyways.

 

And yes I suppose it is open to manipulation, but I have a positive view of the people on here and choose to believe that it would happen rarely, if ever.

I like Rich's idea the most too. It's not too drastic of a change at all so I think it works quite well. ^_^

 

And at least if "cheap" songs go on the ban list people still have the chance to discover them who haven't already.

And yes I suppose it is open to manipulation, but I have a positive view of the people on here and choose to believe that it would happen rarely, if ever.

 

I agree, it could at least be trialled for one contest, and if it was quite clear that people were manipulating the system, go back to the drawing board for XXV, but like I said, I can't see a cluster of people on here that would gang up to get some unknown song on the banlist just because of a personal problem with somebody. As for Ben's worry that this system could potentially have people trying to block the same song twice, yes it could but the only songs in my recollection that have ever been reserved by somebody with no intention to send them are the really cheap ones or cheap artists at least - I don't think anyone has ever used tactical reservations to avoid somebody sending something original out of spite. At least at the artist reservation stage this is a public thing for all to see, so if did start happening everyone would know exactly who the culprit was anyway.

Can someone open the Green Room for BJSC24 and have some information on when BJSC24 starts? Its really annoying to have to check out BJSC everyday when nothing happens here -_-

Also, about the AF rule. I know you said after 2 months we can use the current era's album tracks etc... but I think we should put the ban on album tracks, until it's clear that they're finished with that era. The reason I say this is because I could send 'Outta My Head' by Leona, because it's 2 months + old now, but I still think it's incredibly cheap if someone sent it... (Do people get what I mean? :lol:)

 

This is just an idea. Surely something can be ammended to my post. Or are we all happy with having the 2 month rule? :unsure:

Also, about the AF rule. I know you said after 2 months we can use the current era's album tracks etc... but I think we should put the ban on album tracks, until it's clear that they're finished with that era. The reason I say this is because I could send 'Outta My Head' by Leona, because it's 2 months + old now, but I still think it's incredibly cheap if someone sent it... (Do people get what I mean? :lol:)

 

This is just an idea. Surely something can be ammended to my post. Or are we all happy with having the 2 month rule? :unsure:

 

I completely agree with this actually

Can someone open the Green Room for BJSC24 and have some information on when BJSC24 starts? Its really annoying to have to check out BJSC everyday when nothing happens here -_-

It isn't starting until the end of the first week of February, I said in the opening post ;)

I'm using this gap as an excuse to flood my chart with Eurovision NF songs instead of BJSC entries (as if I need an excuse :drama:)

Also, about the AF rule. I know you said after 2 months we can use the current era's album tracks etc... but I think we should put the ban on album tracks, until it's clear that they're finished with that era. The reason I say this is because I could send 'Outta My Head' by Leona, because it's 2 months + old now, but I still think it's incredibly cheap if someone sent it... (Do people get what I mean? :lol:)

 

This is just an idea. Surely something can be ammended to my post. Or are we all happy with having the 2 month rule? :unsure:

So still going with the original proposal RE: AF Extension then?