Same here.

 

+1

 

I will say though, as depressing as it is that we have a thread devoted to banning entries, this rule of nominating songs is better than having songs that werent all that cheap banned aswell.

+1

 

et moi

+1

 

I will say though, as depressing as it is that we have a thread devoted to banning entries, this rule of nominating songs is better than having songs that werent all that cheap banned aswell.

Edited February 2, 201015 yr by Freeze

et moi

add me to that list.

 

 

I don't like this idea, among other reasons.

I really don't get why people get so stressed about "cheap" entries. If you deem it to be cheap, don't vote for it. Simple as. All of these rules are just complicated man.

 

I won't be voting.

add me to that list.

I don't like this idea, among other reasons.

Whaaaaaaaat?! The whole reason this sort of thing came about is because you were bitching about cheapness overuling everything else. What's not to like, is it not strict enough for you?

 

I can't say I'm a great fan of the idea, I'm not likely to ever nominate in this. (I'm just against banning 'cheap' full stop.) But it strikes me as odd that you, of all people, aren't taking part in this bit.

 

Anyway, nominating has slowed down, but I think this has been a success overall. We haven't got too many disqualified songs.

 

 

I'm glad that there aren't many songs banned - having 2 or 3 songs that most people will have already heard and made an opinion on banned is a lot more favourable to me than having all of the playlists, charts etc...and a mod constructed list banned as well as the prospect of possible disqualification halfway through a contest, which could have led to 100-150 banned entries a month and a hell of a lot of walkouts I expect! this is much fairer and less harsh/strict in my opinion. If it's not generally felt to have been a success though or indeed necessary (judging by the amount of people not nominating), I'd have no problem if we reverted back to the original rules for XXV. I just hope that if a predictable song slips through the net and wins this contest we don't get the usual complaints of 'uninspired/cheap winner' because with this rule in place, nobody has any cause to complain at any song doing well really - if a song is not generally deemed cheap enough, it won't be banned and therefore it shouldn't be a problem to anyone should it appear in and win the contest.

I'm not mad keen on this idea myself, but it's better than banning whole playlists as you say Rich. I just hope that this doesn't backfire, if someone previews their entry in their National Thread or the Green Room before the contest, the possibility is there for people to gang up on them and get a non-cheap entry banned... I hope that hasn't happened yet :wacko:

I'm not mad keen on this idea myself, but it's better than banning whole playlists as you say Rich. I just hope that this doesn't backfire, if someone previews their entry in their National Thread or the Green Room before the contest, the possibility is there for people to gang up on them and get a non-cheap entry banned... I hope that hasn't happened yet :wacko:

 

I think it'll be at the hosts discretion whether an entry is banned in the end.....for example if they banned a song/artist that is extremley unknown it would be blatantly obvious what was going on.

I'm not mad keen on this idea myself, but it's better than banning whole playlists as you say Rich. I just hope that this doesn't backfire, if someone previews their entry in their National Thread or the Green Room before the contest, the possibility is there for people to gang up on them and get a non-cheap entry banned... I hope that hasn't happened yet :wacko:

 

Is there really anyone in this contest unfair enough to do something like that? That would make me sad.

Is there really anyone in this contest unfair enough to do something like that?

The answer is obvious isn't it?

 

:kink:

Is there really anyone in this contest unfair enough to do something like that? That would make me sad.

Yes.

 

Which is partially why i don't like this system. It is open to abuse.

Yes.

 

Which is partially why i don't like this system. It is open to abuse.

 

it's just as bad as holding onto somebody in the reservations thread that you have no intention to send, just to stop somebody else sending them in my opinion :o

 

it's only open to the same level of abuse as the current system, Pavel has stated that he wants to send Owen Pallett, I could easily get there first and reserve him - despite me having no intention of sending him...in fact that's probably more open to abuse as it only takes one person to scupper somebody else's plans, this system takes at least three people + the hosts discretion

^Exactly the reason why I havent announced yet the artists I plan on using for BJSC24. The lets-ban-everything-remotely-cheap brigade would have them disqualified in a shot :lol:

LOL I realised i'm one of the very few who revealed their intentions indeed! :lol: But looking at my chart would also open a mystery -_-

it's just as bad as holding onto somebody in the reservations thread that you have no intention to send, just to stop somebody else sending them in my opinion :o

 

it's only open to the same level of abuse as the current system, Pavel has stated that he wants to send Owen Pallett, I could easily get there first and reserve him - despite me having no intention of sending him...in fact that's probably more open to abuse as it only takes one person to scupper somebody else's plans, this system takes at least three people + the hosts discretion

Which i sit on the receiving end of frequently.

 

And i know i've done it, but i blocked something cheap. I haven't blocked someone's entry to be a spiteful c**t. Which other people have.

 

I can't abide the Artist Reservation system either.

LOL I realised i'm one of the very few who revealed their intentions indeed! :lol: But looking at my chart would also open a mystery -_-

I've revealed my intentions but i have a back up plan incase anyone decides to be a prick.

I can't abide the Artist Reservation system either.

 

I would be quite happy to see the back of it too, it's unfair having the opportunity to hold onto five artists for as long as you like, a couple which you might not even have the intention of using but are there to make up the numbers

 

And as we've seen far too often, it favours the people who are online at the exact time that the thread opens who get their pick of the bunch first - I won't be online between 6pm tonight and probably 2/3pm tomorrow, during which time I fully expect the thread to have been opened for at least 15 hours, I'll just hope that the artists I want to send are still available :lol:

I would be quite happy to see the back of it too, it's unfair having the opportunity to hold onto five artists for as long as you like, a couple which you might not even have the intention of using but are there to make up the numbers

 

And as we've seen far too often, it favours the people who are online at the exact time that the thread opens who get their pick of the bunch first - I won't be online between 6pm tonight and probably 2/3pm tomorrow, during which time I fully expect the thread to have been opened for at least 15 hours, I'll just hope that the artists I want to send are still available :lol:

we had a system that worked just fine until an influx of people with no patience and no common curtsey

The answer is obvious isn't it?

 

:kink:

 

 

Yes.

 

Which is partially why i don't like this system. It is open to abuse.

 

Now you made me sad. :(

 

But the answer wasn't so obvious to me, tbh. There is one person I could imagine doing that but not more.