Having Icona Pop in the contest was not fun. The only bad thing about that contest really, as there was quite a real possibility it would landslide it and take out every inspired entry there was. I do think the mods have been a little strict this time - I'd have let Neon Hitch slide - but I can understand their reasoning for the others.

 

It's not that hard to avoid a veto to be honest, yes, there may be inconsistencies, but something won't be banned for no reason at all. Seriously, all these artists we've been discussing have been very successful in this contest in the past, times and posters may change, but we've been introduced to the artists before, if they've done well in the past, by entering a new song of theirs, you are running a risk of veto.

 

I do this contest for fun, like I'd hope everyone else, but I lose some of that fun when I'm seeing songs I already know well (and when the bad ones of that category go on to snatch an easy top 10 it's awful :() in the contest. Too much thought has gone into this post though, summary: the contest suffers from cheap, but we shouldn't be taking it that seriously.

part of me likes to think that's we'd all be discerning enough to mark down the ones we see as cheap so letting a few borderline ones slip wouldn't be TOO disastrous.

Just so we're clear, we have no problem discussing this with anybody. I'm, personally, just MIFFED at a couple of you, so please don't think I'm pissed off at anybody who brings up a point. I'm not. It's just a bit hard to discuss this rationally at the moment. I'm cool with most of you! ZEN etc.

 

It's good to know even the mods aren't above being petty *.*

 

I don't see how refusing to deal with some childish comments is being petty. I doubt you would deal with them either if the roles were swapped.

 

So basically this is not even up for discussion. What a fabulous attitude. None of the posts you quoted were even especially rude, people just want to know what's going to change to make sure we don't end up in this situation again. A lot of good points have been made on the last page and you've just bulldozed all over them and basically dismissed everybody who isn't subservient to the mods' decision as rude and beneath you. Charming.

 

You clearly have a talent for twisting everything I say. I've said I don't have a problem discussing this, and we have discussed this many times before. You obviously missed the huge debate about the veto system we had a few months ago and you've clearly chosen to ignore the changes we made that were recommended by the members here, so congratulations for that. I've made our willingness to discuss worries clear and it baffles me as to how you still can't comprehend that. I just don't feel like discussing it with people who choose to find fault in every single thing and call our work "pathetic". If you even knew anything about me then you'd know I'm the last person who would think of anybody being underneath me. I'd appreciate it if you would just kindly back off. If you think I'm being unreasonable and abusing my power blah blah blah then please PM an admin and make a complaint.

I don't think you're abusing your position, I just think the system is highly suspect and doesn't seem to have any sense of continuity from one contest to the next. God only knows why you're taking this so personally. What I called pathetic was the decision to veto Jess Mills and I stand by that in the light of the fact that no solid justification has been given for it. And no, I didn't read the debate a few months back, I wasn't playing BJSC then. It's hardly relevant anyway since I'm talking about this contest, now, the present.

 

Being serious for a moment, I'm not saying the mods are doing a bad job, I don't AGREE with the decisions obviously, but that doesn't mean I don't appreciate how much time/effort it takes. I think it would be a very good thing to have a formal list of written rules/guidelines/whatever to follow, certain criteria that WOULD mean a song gets vetoed, so we could check it out ourselves without having to wait for a decision. That doesn't mean using a ranking system similar to that in place needs to stop, but having criteria like 'must not appear in XX personal charts' and the like that are SOLID and non negotiable would be very good. In my opinion your honour(s).

As I said a couple of pages back there are far too many variables to take into account to give a solid list of guidelines. I would LOVE to give a set list out that says your entry will stand a high chance of being vetoed if one or some of the following conditions are met but there is so many variations on stuff it becomes very hard.

 

 

What I will attempt to do tomorrow for y'all is come up with a really rough set of guidelines. It'll be long and very specific (as in if it has X amount of pages in pop, X amount in dance etc etc etc). I'll kick start it tomorrow and work with the rest of the guys to do the best we can for you. This won't be a case of if it looks like it passes through the rough guide then it will walk through the veto, it'll be a case of if it passes through the guide it stands a very good chance of walking through the veto unscathed. I will make sure it's up within the next couple of days so you can all see it and query any issues you have with it so we can explain it and make any necessary alterations to it before the next contest.

 

I just wish we could all go back to enjoying BJSC :( I'm sick of y'all being so serious, it's making my brain delirious etc etc.

 

The only thing I really would like answered is WHY we've gotten more strict with the veto. Whether it's a delayed response to Icona Pop or what, I don't know, but if anything recent months have shown that the more obvious entries haven't really endangered the contest at all. Neon Hitch is quite similar to Florrie from a few months back, really, and I can't quite see the logic in banning her. I don't want to attack the mods and I honestly think they are doing a fine job but I would like to hear the reasoning behind the current approach. I know y'all have the same "if it's a danger to the contest, we ban it" motto every month but Wynter Gordon, Sia and Charli XCX were allowed very recently and I have to wonder what's changed in between now and then.

Once again, like I said a couple of pages ago.... We very recently changed the way we go about vetoing entries there recent months as part of our continuation of the outcome of that big thread a few months back. Since then we've made a lot of little changes to the way we do things based on some suggestions we got and some of our own thoughts that were inspired by the overwhelming response that thread received. What Cal has very kindly taken on is the mass googling of entries to really scour for things like internet hype, personal chart appearances, buzzjack hype and so on. Because of this a lot of more borderline things that may have gone through in some more lax months in the past are being caught. It's a dynamic system that is improving and growing better as we go. It's been around like 20contests now but we are still finding small ways to tweek it to try and make it fairer and better.

 

I don't think you're abusing your position, I just think the system is highly suspect and doesn't seem to have any sense of continuity from one contest to the next. God only knows why you're taking this so personally. What I called pathetic was the decision to veto Jess Mills and I stand by that in the light of the fact that no solid justification has been given for it. And no, I didn't read the debate a few months back, I wasn't playing BJSC then. It's hardly relevant anyway since I'm talking about this contest, now, the present.

 

The continuity from the past two contests I would say has been really spot on. I know we have suffered with some issues with that in the past but with the amazing hard work Cal has put in we've been able to work out more of a hard and fast formula. It's not fool proof and it will never appease everyone but we are really trying to make it as consistent as we possibly can. If you have any suggestions as to the way that we can do this please feel free to post them or PM one of us. (bullet points would be appreciated as it's easy to miss some smaller things hidden between much larger one's when we are tired.) We did actually move one of our veto threads through to this forum from our staff forum to be fully transparent about the process that goes on, I'll look into doing that to one of the High/Medium/Low Risk contests sometime this week which will allow you to see what we actually do when it comes to deciding a veto and that it's not just us 4 mods but Dandy*, Mark and Matt that chip in with comments and suggestions too.

 

I would say that debate is relevant still though. Things don't really change that much in BJSC. If anything the make up of the contestants will change the type of music that does well but that's about it so things that were discussed there and the changes we are still making now because of that thread are still applicable to this contest.

 

 

IIRC (and if I am incorrect, you'll have to forgive me I've just finished a 4-midnight shift so it's been a long day) Jess Mills was vetoed because there was a very high level of internet hype and the hype was building on buzzjack. The contest is aiming to be a way to discover music you wouldn't have heard without BJSC which is why it's fantastic to have such a great mix of pop/indie posters (even if it means my chance at year end #1 has now vanished :cry:) as we do get a lot of people getting to hear new music from genres they may not really have explored before. We judged Jess Mills (and Neon Hitch, Agnes and basically everything we veto) to be something that a lot of the participants and likely fans would have heard without the contest. I know this is very subjective but all the mods have got a lot of experience in the contest and we have gotten very good at estimating the size of a songs potential audience. You are welcome to appeal a decision we make (and always have been although it's yet to be done). If you want to do this then we ask that you PM us with a list of reasons you think it should have it's veto overturned and we will discuss that list and our original reasons for vetoing and decide again.

 

If you are really unhappy about this system please do take the time to list some suggestions and some questions that you'd like answered and we shall do our best to answer/address them.

I don't think you're abusing your position, I just think the system is highly suspect and doesn't seem to have any sense of continuity from one contest to the next. God only knows why you're taking this so personally. What I called pathetic was the decision to veto Jess Mills and I stand by that in the light of the fact that no solid justification has been given for it. And no, I didn't read the debate a few months back, I wasn't playing BJSC then. It's hardly relevant anyway since I'm talking about this contest, now, the present.

 

 

I have a long post written but I'll just address this first. :D I'm taking it personally because you implied that I'm superior to the rest of you which I'm not. And we have justified Jess Mills and most other posters now understand why it was vetoed. Plus, I do think the debate a few months ago is relevant especially if you're talking about the present and not seeing any continuity, but we'll agree to disagree!

 

So here's my view and reply to all the rest of you. I didn't have time today to deal with everybody else because I was busy getting closer to retirement (22 feels SO OLD). Heartbreaking. </3 Jark/John/whoever else I replied to earlier: my gripe with you isn't personal. There's just a lot of pressure at the moment and it's hard to get everything right all the time. I think it's safe to say most people here are happy with most of the vetoes, so we're happy that they're happy. Happiness all round. The way some of you reacted seemed just a bit WHAT because comments were made before allowing us to explain why we vetoed something. Usually we just announce the vetoes at the end and give reasons, but you let people know your track had been vetoed and you were angry and it was kind of hard to keep our cool when we didn't have any chance to explain before some comments were made. It was all down to timing. Perhaps from now on we'll announce the vetoes as soon as they're vetoed and give the reasons why, thus not allowing people's emotions run high and lead to basically this situation. So, here's my novel:

 

I pitched an idea to the rest of the team a few months ago about researching each entry and assigning it to a certain 'risk' category. Usually what we'd do before is just basically pick out the most obvious tracks and discuss them, but I thought it would be better to research all of them so that tracks that perhaps we haven't heard of but are a tad cheap (like Canadian or Australian or even Korean) are discussed properly. It was warmly received so I got on with it. The process involves first Googling each entry and jotting down which sites/blogs it has been featured on and how well they're performing in the charts around the world. If an entry seems to be popular on the web, then we see if there are threads on this forum and your personal charts are checked. Your charts give us a good indication of what is popular and whom it's popular with (but let's face it, if a member we've never heard of called chartfan90 and his friend chartbabe94 have been charting it at #1 for the past year then obviously we don't take that into account).

 

The borderline songs are ALWAYS ALWAYS ALWAYS the ones that cause the most uproar. Some of the songs might fit the criteria of being veto-worthy, but we honestly don't feel that they should be vetoed, so they're let through. It has nothing to do with personal taste whatsoever. I've supported vetoing tracks I love, and the same can be said for the other mods. We try to go by set guidelines but it's really difficult to do so when certain songs come along. For example, if I sent the latest single from a heavy metal band that has a fairly hefty thread in the Metal forum and is Kerrang! and Scuzz's Song of the Year and has been featured as a 'guilty pleasure' on Popjustice (not gonna happen, I know, but bear with me!) and myself and a few others have charted it then it fits a lot of the criteria. But we can't really veto it because it's not a genre that will appeal to most of you, so we let it through. So when a pop song comes along that kind of fits the criteria, we then see if the artist has been entered before. If they have and were successful, then we lean towards a veto because they're going to have the added advantage of basically being the new Keri Hilson of BJSC despite maybe not being a clear veto. This was my personal take on Neon Hitch. The song may not have set the world alight yet (Sizable YouTube views, Popjustice and the Huffington Post, but not much personal chart action) but they (she? idk) have been entered 4 times before, so we kind of had to draw the line somewhere. I know other recycled artists sometimes make it through but they are almost always borderline and may not have any buzz whatsoever. The decisions are hard and we don't make them lightly, so please don't start to think we just fart on the veto button for a joke. It's becoming more and more common to have to get other people involved in the vetoing process, namely Dandy* and Jester. RabbitFurCoat is free to join in but I don't think he's around our parts too often. We decided they were the best and most convenient as they already keep an eye on what we do and they represent different sections of the BJSC 'tastes'. For the record, I don't think Dandy* and Jester were involved in the controversial vetoes this month so please don't hate them. :P I think it just needs to be made clear that we do sometimes ask for help when it comes to certain songs. Sometimes we're completely split (this was the case for Nervo last contest), so we get them to help.

 

I think I made a PDF of last contest's 'risk' system, I'll try find it (you should see my folders on this computer - total nightmare, naming everything 'iubdbdbjdks' doesn't help either). Maybe this will help ease the fears a little. I'll try get it sorted tomorrow ('today' if we're being technical) because I'm absolutely wiped at the moment. Haha.

 

EDIT: Oh Phil, we're like long post TWINS! :D

Tempted to rename myself to "chartbabe94" but that essay is fabulous and pretty much explains everything :D Thanks Cal + Silas.

I appreciate both of your posts. I think this debate probably got a little too heated for what is essentially just a bit of fun. But conversely the fact that it's a bit of fun is why some of these vetoes can seem unfair or unnecessary, and I do think the mod team would benefit from being a little more lenient and having faith in the BJSC participants to decide for themselves if a moderately cheap entry is worthy of their votes.

 

Just to give an example based on one of the example criteria in your post Cal, the entry I've gone with this month (which hasn't yet been vetoed, I don't know if it will or not) is by an artist who a year or so ago won the contest. It's an album track which as a song has no particular buzz, and despite having a BJSC winning song under her belt, the artist's thread probably sees about two posts a week, if that. I personally don't think the song should be vetoed just because the artist is a past winner - time has elapsed, it's a great song in its own right. But this scenario seems very similar to Neon Hitch and I don't think she should've been vetoed either given that you concede she wasn't featured in many personal charts (and surely buzz on Buzzjack is a hundred times more relevant than another forum or the Huffington Post).

 

Anyway I really do appreciate that you both took the time to explain the process in depth there and I'm very interested in Silas' rough guidelines. It would just be nice if as few 'subjective'/iffy criteria as possible could make up those guidelines to avoid situations where we feel hard done by because our songs got vetoed. :D

 

Cal and Silas has practically explained everything and each and every reason in which the people in this thread were questioned and brilliantly as well. I respect your decisions even more now and so much effort from Cal who has dedicated time to research each individual track as well so thanks and I appreciate it. ^_^

Edited September 10, 201212 yr by Oricon

are we all best friends yet <3

Leww has Lana Del Rey spinning in his sig - watch that get popular now, MONTHS after I did it first :(

Edited September 10, 201212 yr by Umi

Leww has Lana Del Rey spinning in his sig - watch that get popular now, MONTHS after I did it first :(

 

only in it for queenzealia's tappa tappa #staypressed

EDIT: Oh Phil, we're like long post TWINS! :D

Great minds think post alike! :D

 

 

(I second Cal's post basically, it's probably going to find itself in a slightly more condensed form :kink: in the rough guidelines thread)

 

Tempted to rename myself to "chartbabe94" but that essay is fabulous and pretty much explains everything :D Thanks Cal + Silas.

You do that and I'll do chartfan89 (I'm too much of an old cunt for 90 :( )

 

(You're welcome)

 

I appreciate both of your posts. I think this debate probably got a little too heated for what is essentially just a bit of fun. But conversely the fact that it's a bit of fun is why some of these vetoes can seem unfair or unnecessary, and I do think the mod team would benefit from being a little more lenient and having faith in the BJSC participants to decide for themselves if a moderately cheap entry is worthy of their votes.

 

Just to give an example based on one of the example criteria in your post Cal, the entry I've gone with this month (which hasn't yet been vetoed, I don't know if it will or not) is by an artist who a year or so ago won the contest. It's an album track which as a song has no particular buzz, and despite having a BJSC winning song under her belt, the artist's thread probably sees about two posts a week, if that. I personally don't think the song should be vetoed just because the artist is a past winner - time has elapsed, it's a great song in its own right. But this scenario seems very similar to Neon Hitch and I don't think she should've been vetoed either given that you concede she wasn't featured in many personal charts (and surely buzz on Buzzjack is a hundred times more relevant than another forum or the Huffington Post).

 

Anyway I really do appreciate that you both took the time to explain the process in depth there and I'm very interested in Silas' rough guidelines. It would just be nice if as few 'subjective'/iffy criteria as possible could make up those guidelines to avoid situations where we feel hard done by because our songs got vetoed. :D

 

If it didn't get heated and go out of proportion for a fun contest it wouldn't be BJSC :lol: We have some very passionate participants which is really quite good as it shows you care. We brought in the veto system because people weren't self regulating, giving their points to things like Silly Boy then moaning that it won and was an obvious winner. So we try to avoid that as much as physically possible which is why sometimes it looks like we are being overly harsh but we genuinely believe it is something that is capable of being one of those runaway obvious winners that do no good for the contest. This year has been probably the most unpredictable year of BJSC yet and while I'm far from a fan of some winners it's been great to see that unpredictability.

 

Your entry is being discussed currently. It certainly wouldn't be vetoed just because they won in the past. Eva of Silly Boy fame was entered not so long ago and despite holding the record for the highest amount of points won by a single entry it sailed through unvetoed because of the complete lack of hype. Past BJSC performance is something we look into but depending on how well it performed/how many times the artist was entered it gets a different level of weighting assigned to it. So Tone Damli/Eric Saade's very successful BJSC past was a big reason for us vetoing it a couple of months ago but had I gone with one of my options and entered Charlotte Gainsbourg her past BJSC performance (a DNQ and mid table finish) wouldn't have carried a significant weight because it ain't a shit hot track record now is it? (I hope that makes sense, I'll probably reread this in the morning and find it's a load of shit but hey ho.). The artist you have entered was vetoed recently with a different track which is why we don't yet have a definitive answer for you. The more borderline variables, the longer the discussion.

 

I will do my best to get some kind of guidelines to you very soon. If the rest of the mod's ok it, possibly tomorrow night at the earliest!

 

Cal and Silas has practically explained everything and each and every reason in which the people in this thread were questioned and brilliantly as well. I respect your decisions even more now and so much effort from Cal who has dedicated time to research each individual track as well so thanks and I appreciate it. ^_^

That's awfully kind of you to say, thank you!

 

are we all best friends yet <3

If there is a cake made out of rainbows, yes....

are we all best friends yet <3

 

http://media.tumblr.com/tumblr_llw6q55rHw1qf69w9.gif

Apologies for the essays, I promise they have a point this time though!

Is this gonna turn out as bad as when that guy entered Alesha Dixon's Breathe Slow and shit went crazy?! please say no.

Phew, that was a lorra lorra readin'.

 

Basically thanks Silas (and Cal) for taking the time to explain all this shit. I wasn't really calling out your risk assessment method Cal, but thank you for explaining it all the same, it never hurts to have it down in black and white. As for Silas' offer to come up with a rough set of guiderulelines whatever, that's perfect and really all I wanted. I realise I could have gone about it in a better way, but it's just so easy to allow frustration to do the typing for you sometimes.

Missed this ENTIRE thread until just now, I'm so out of the loop, I used to be in the thick of the BJSC arguments!

 

Anyway...I've confirmed a very simple pop song this month, not expecting major things from it as the contest has long moved on from such things doing well but it's catchy, cute and I love it so hopefully others will take to it too.

Is this gonna turn out as bad as when that guy entered Alesha Dixon's Breathe Slow and shit went crazy?! please say no.

 

Yeah, that was kinda ME. Awkward.