September 8, 201212 yr Ah yes, For My Sins does indeed seem to be in many charts, in that case I can see why it's been veto'd - before looking I didn't think it had any hype/interest so sorry Cal for moaning and contesting!
September 8, 201212 yr So the criteria is basically, if you think a song is an obvious BJSC hit, it gets vetoed? Because 'Jess Mills is building popularity online' seems pretty weak to me. Surely the obvious solution is to use criteria which aren't subjective because actually that gives you the power to veto pretty much anything without actually having to justify it. It is pathetic. http://24.media.tumblr.com/tumblr_m9tw0yGW2l1r2dua5o4_400.gif
September 8, 201212 yr TBH I'm surprised my entry didn't get vetoed. Y'all will realise when they get revealed.
September 8, 201212 yr Please, there's no need to apologize! She was one of the ones I was worried about a little because she isn't 'in your face' well-known, but upon a further inspection she began ticking a lot of the criteria boxes. It's a shame but we thought it was for the best. So the criteria is basically, if you think a song is an obvious BJSC hit, it gets vetoed? Because 'Jess Mills is building popularity online' seems pretty weak to me. Surely the obvious solution is to use criteria which aren't subjective because actually that gives you the power to veto pretty much anything without actually having to justify it. It is pathetic. That's not what we're saying and that's not what your "pathetic" gibe was aimed at in the first place so I don't know what you're playing at?
September 8, 201212 yr TBH I'm surprised my entry didn't get vetoed. Y'all will realise when they get revealed. There are a few that definitely need to be discussed a bit more, so you're not out of the woods yet! :P
September 8, 201212 yr Well given confirmation closes in a few days you better not leave me hanging for too long.
September 8, 201212 yr What we need to do is to make a cheap BJSC contest and see how popular it would be. I personally would absolutely love to see Gaga and J-Lo et al winning, who needs new music?
September 8, 201212 yr I was just wondering would it be possible at all to have a standardised checklist when vetoing? I know we currently have the guidelines that have become more specific over time, but would it be possible to have set figures for certain things so that there would be no case for argument? For example could you have things like, a song would be vetoed if: - the artist has a thread on Buzzjack with 2 or more pages. - the song is in 10 or more personal charts. - the song can be found on 3 or more popular blogs (to be predetermined by mods). Maybe it wouldn't be possible, but putting a specific number to some of the things may make it easier for us to understand?
September 8, 201212 yr That's a really good idea, Ryan. It would make things a lot more fairer. I think things are good how they are but I have been baffled as to how some songs got through and others didn't, and this would make things more clear cut.
September 8, 201212 yr Why don't we just stop complaining and let the mods do what they do because they know best [/silas]
September 8, 201212 yr I was just wondering would it be possible at all to have a standardised checklist when vetoing? I know we currently have the guidelines that have become more specific over time, but would it be possible to have set figures for certain things so that there would be no case for argument? For example could you have things like, a song would be vetoed if: - the artist has a thread on Buzzjack with 2 or more pages. - the song is in 10 or more personal charts. - the song can be found on 3 or more popular blogs (to be predetermined by mods). Maybe it wouldn't be possible, but putting a specific number to some of the things may make it easier for us to understand? We already have that. We've stated the reasons why a song might be vetoed. I personally don't think this would be needed, or even possible, because there are a lot of different factors why a song or artist might be vetoed, and we also never see the country names when we go through the confirmation list, so the person sending the song never (NEVER) comes into it.
September 8, 201212 yr We already have that. We've stated the reasons why a song might be vetoed. I personally don't think this would be needed, or even possible, because there are a lot of different factors why a song or artist might be vetoed, and we also never see the country names when we go through the confirmation list, so the person sending the song never (NEVER) comes into it. Yeah, I do question whether having specific numbers for different things would be possible as they are so many different factors. Like Bre says, I'm sure you know what to veto and what not to for the good of the contest but some just want it to be made a bit more clear - and I'm sure you do try to make it as clear as possible. It is just bound to cause some "anger" (not really the right word) as different people will have different interpretations of how strict the veto process should be. Edited September 8, 201212 yr by Ryan741
September 8, 201212 yr It's hard to put a set number on these things as there is just too many factors to take into account. A 2 page thread in the pop forum could only have 5 people replying in it and the one bellow might have 21 people replying. Then how long it's been open needs to come into play as well. There are different standards for different forums as well. 2 pages in a week is low for pop but huge for dance. Its a lot of variables to try and simplify. It's the same with blogs. Some blogs carry much more weight than others and can count for 2 or 3 times more than other popular sources. I would love to write out a specific list of our requirements like that but the sheer number of variables makes it exceedingly hard to do. We have very recently changed the way we go about the veto. It's all part of the changes we made from that big mess of an argument a few months ago. Cal actually spends a whole heap of time researching each track and assigning them a low, medium or high risk based on factors like popularity on Buzzjack, Blog hype, chart performance (UK, International and personal), past BJSC performance etc. From there we tend to prioritise discussion of the high risk ones, then raise any issues we have with a medium or low risk song. I think I'm right in saying that so far all of the veto's since we switched system have come from the high risk category. As far as Agnes is concerned most if not all of the people that would be voting for that song will have been people who have downloaded the album so already know it. It's mass exposure to BJSC participants is why we unanimously voted to ditch Agnes. We've been working hard to make BJSC a fun way of discovering music that you wouldn't know without the contest. Sometimes we can be over cautious with some songs that we think are going to explode and then don't but I personally think we learn, adapt and fine tune our systems every month. It's not something we're ever going to be able get 100% right in everybody's eyes. We all have opinions that are far too different for that to happen. We have a good make up of people on the mod panel and with the GM/Admin team dropping by to give their opinions we cover a good cross section of the contest to really try to make the best decision for the contest.
September 8, 201212 yr Wait can u really not send something if its in UP? I feel like the people participating in both contests are relatively different, with only a few overlapping. I'd like to see how Twigs would fair in BJSC edit: Though, on second thought, BJSC has been sort of turning more and more into UP and vice versa. so maybe thats a good idea
September 8, 201212 yr When UP first started there were only about 8 who did both, this month was something like 19/29 are in BJSC too.
September 8, 201212 yr Wait can u really not send something if its in UP? I feel like the people participating in both contests are relatively different, with only a few overlapping. I'd like to see how Twigs would fair in BJSC edit: Though, on second thought, BJSC has been sort of turning more and more into UP and vice versa. so maybe thats a good idea It's not an instant veto but if it's in UP and well hyped on blogs or Buzzjack it's safe to assume it's probably out.
September 8, 201212 yr Whoever has done some recycling from Ashton's early 2012 entries is a cert for top5. Don't think it's quite as good as my entry from earlier this year but it's still a tune.
September 8, 201212 yr I UNDERSTAND the veto process, I just think it's a little SKETCHY at times. But then, I would say that as I've had 2 entires vetoed in recent months.
Create an account or sign in to comment