Jump to content

Contest Format 52 members have voted

  1. 1. Should the all-in-one format used in BJSC XXVI stay as a permanent feature?

    • Yes
      24
    • No
      22
  2. 2. What aspect did you like the most about the new format?

    • Everyone was involved + could vote for everything
      27
    • New points system
      19
    • Other (please state)
      3
    • None
      13

Please sign in or register to vote in this poll.

Featured Replies

If there were semis last time everyone would've had to listen to and form an opinion on 39/48 songs over the fortnight. I don't see why having to listen to an extra 25% is so difficult. :|
  • Replies 316
  • Views 17.3k
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

I have absolutely NO idea how I got 9 top tens in a row. That concept seems so foreign to me now. I don't know how I used to do so well lawlz.
If there were semis last time everyone would've had to listen to and form an opinion on 39/48 songs over the fortnight. I don't see why having to listen to an extra 25% is so difficult. :|

 

Agreed, and I've said it before. Honestly the only VALID complain against the one big final I see is that it does undoubtedly remove some of the intensity/competition from BJSC, which I don't see as a bad thing but it is a point.

  • Author
I have absolutely NO idea how I got 9 top tens in a row. That concept seems so foreign to me now. I don't know how I used to do so well lawlz.

poppoppop goes the world

I have absolutely NO idea how I got 9 top tens in a row. That concept seems so foreign to me now. I don't know how I used to do so well lawlz.

This, 7 top 10's in the first 11 contests.

 

only 2 since then :nocheer:

The hostility between both sides here is depressing....even if it's not all out war there's alot of sarcasm and bad feelings going around. It's an online game, we love it sure....but it's not something we should be getting so snotty about. :/

 

I think both sides have trouble debating.....

 

Maybe instead of this hostility we should try to work towards a compromise? I think we can all see clearly that there isn't a majority here and I think it's extremely irresponsible to take one side over the other when it's so close. Basically just saying "well this side won by a few votes so now you guys can go stuff yourselves" is not going to bode well for the contest at all. :(

 

But then again that's what all these votes have usually come down to in the past, when many people liked an idea but more people hated it so the people who liked it had to suck it up and move on....

 

Does anyone else at all see a massive flaw in how we decide on these things? :/ Many people here argue their cases with threats of "I'm leaving if this stays". So? Leave then....what has that got to do with anything? It's just someone puffing their chest out and planning a dramatic exit in their heads.

 

Then there's some people who can't seem to accept that someone plain not liking something they've tried might be a valid reason after all. Obviously this person saying "no" feels uncomfortable with the thought of a big final and that should at least be respected. Also some people have mentioned that they have trouble getting through 47 songs in two weeks and then the yes side will say that they have no problems getting through 47 songs in two weeks. Isn't it possible that the people voting yes were more enthusiastic about the thought of a big final so they managed to get through 47 songs alot easier. While the side that had bad feelings about the final to begin with and were not very enthusiastic found it harder to get through so many songs?

 

The bottom line is....I'm pretty sure when people are working together on a team to organise something....that they don't make threats that they'll quit if they don't like something, that they can see when somebody is unhappy about something and have some form of compassion and understanding of why someone might not like an idea. I'm sure they argue/debate too but I think they'd do that with aim of trying and improve whatever they're organising and not trying to get one up on the other person which it sorta feels like it can be the case here sometimes.

 

This would go along alot more smoothly if people didn't associate debate with threats of leaving and a "I don't understand why you feel this way so it's silly" attitude. Maybe you could try really hard to understand why this person feels this way instead of just throwing it away?

 

(I always get nervous posting these comments, but I spent like 40 minutes typing it I'm definitely posting it, sorry for writing an essay)

 

Coming up with a compromise would probably be hard but not impossible. I think that one of the ideas proposed earlier of swapping between semis and full final each month was a very decent compromise. I suppose we'd need a compromise for the compromise though by the sounds of it...:(

 

Edit: Ugh it's so long....I could have submitted this for my English Leaving Cert exam if I had it back then XD

Edited by Sabrewulf

How about the people who voted for one big final get through to the final and those who don't can qualify for the remaining 8 or so places :kink:?

Can you guys take away my vote from NO? I'm voting for COMPROMISE. Compromises are great things, they can build bridges.

 

What if there was a way to keep everyone happy (or nearly everyone, some people will never be pleased) that can actually be achieved if both sides are willing to agree to let go of some power and let both sides have a bit of what they want. Isn't that heaps better than having this negativity and people losing interesting in the contest because the other side won completely.

 

It looks like the outcome of this will be "yes". However what about all those "No's"? Should we just forget them? If "no" were to win should we just forget the "yes's"? Will that improve the contest? :huh:

 

Our role in all this should be trying to get as many yes's as possible and as little no's as possible. (with the people saying "yes" actually wanting to say "yes") Not this right down to the wire business.

 

I'd vote "Yes" towards swapping between semis and full final each month, unless there was a better proposal.

Edited by Sabrewulf

(I always get nervous posting these comments, but I spent like 40 minutes typing it I'm definitely posting it, sorry for writing an essay)

 

No need to apologise. I feel you've told us something important here, about respect and about taking into consideration how other people experience things.. especially if your experience of it is completely different. Generally, the world needs more of this tbh/tbf.

 

A compromise would do more good than permanently implementing something that actually quite a lot of poeple dislike.

  • Author
Cow.

WHAT OF IT, SLUTFACE

 

Obviously we're going for compromise, but the problem is that the compromise will be anathema to most people. The people who want semis will object to the contests that are one big final, and vice versa.

 

The problem here is that most people in the 'no' camp are assuming every contest will be like this one. No activity, no discussion, two weeks of it. I don't see that that has to be the case - I certainly would've induced a lot more discussion and activity had I been around for most of the time, which I wasn't, and we've already said we're more than willing to reduce the voting period. Any complaints over 'too much to listen to' are issues entirely with your timing: you managed to listen to eight fewer songs in the same amount of time before, what's stopping you from doing this? All you need to do is just split the load: listen to half one week and the other half the next week, and hopefully we'll have a recap set for every contest to help you with voting.

  • Author
Can you guys take away my vote from NO? I'm voting for COMPROMISE. Compromises are great things, they can build bridges.

I'm not creating a COMPROMISE option because that could entail so many different things that people conceive - essentially, everyone wants a degree of compromise no matter how small, and we'll have everyone changing their vote to something ridiculously vague. I'll transfer your no to a null vote...

  • Author
It looks like the outcome of this will be "yes". However what about all those "No's"? Should we just forget them? If "no" were to win should we just forget the "yes's"? Will that improve the contest? :huh:

You could say this for essentially everything we've ever put to a poll.

You could say this for essentially everything we've ever put to a poll.

Thats just as good an argument for compromise as it is for a dictatorship :lol:

You could say this for essentially everything we've ever put to a poll.

 

I am saying it, Is it enough to just put things to a poll and then just go with whatever wins?

 

We should have a compromise thread, let people "conceive" these ideas you're talking about. (For a start I don't see how something like swapping between semi finals to big final is vague...it's very straightforward. So what's to say other compromises couldn't be just as straightforward?)

 

Vagueness can be developed upon if enough attention is put in. Obviously you could only add the options that have been well thought out not just someone saying "I want this!" they'd have to explain it fully and properly. (Although I don't think the swapping compromise would need to be explained much but other compromises might be)

 

Why put down compromises before you've even heard them?

Edited by Sabrewulf

You could say this for essentially everything we've ever put to a poll.

 

This is a big one in BJSC terms though. Not something in the likes of banning certain songs etc..

  • Author
I am saying it, Is it enough to just put things to a poll and then just go with whatever wins?

 

We should have a compromise thread, let people "conceive" these ideas you're talking about. I don't see how something like swapping between semi finals to big final is vague...it's very straightforward.

 

Vagueness can be developed upon if enough attention is put in. Obviously you could only add the options that have been well thought out not just someone saying "I want this!" they'd have to explain it fully and properly. (Although I don't think the swapping compromise would need to be explained but other compromises might be)

 

Why put down compromises before you've even heard them?

No, I'm saying the idea of compromise is a vague one. And we both agree that the immediate obvious choice - swapping back and forth - isn't preferable: "the problem is that the compromise will be anathema to most people. The people who want semis will object to the contests that are one big final, and vice versa."

 

I'm not putting down compromises before I've even heard them. I'm not making something which is potentially loads of different ideas a poll option purely because it'll give an entirely inaccurate look to the polls - it will make it seem like everyone is agreeing on something when they're really not, and eventually get used by one group to push through their particular idea under the pretext that it has backing that it doesn't have.

Create an account or sign in to comment

Recently Browsing 0

  • No registered users viewing this page.