I wasn't trying to attack you Bal, I am very sorry as I didn't know the circumstance! Glad you've decided to stick around, Travis! :D

Edited August 29, 20168 yr by Math ☂

Just to air the other side of the argument for Noah's issue - I'm not taking one side or another until we've discussed it internally which we will (but it may take a while for reasons Phil referred to yesterday) - but the revamped rules thread went up just last contest and we really did ask for it to be read carefully, see the subtitle right now. It is slightly annoying that this sort of thing happens just weeks afterwards, but of course accidents do happen.

 

This rule in question has been in place for years now with no issue towards it. What members have had issues towards have been us mods a) changing the rules during the middle of a contest and b) not enforcing some of the rules strictly enough. We wanted the new rules thread to be a clean slate, make sure everything was properly enforced (as for example we've been a bit lenient on who is banned and who isn't before, more out of forgetting who voted when than anything) - just as will be the case with the new veto framework arriving for BJSC 89. Now we are being asked to go against the two things some people have been annoyed at us about: not enforcing one of the rules and changing the rules mid-contest. It really is like we can't win sometimes.

 

The reason for the difference in rules I believe is that if a deadline is extended AFTERWARDS, if any votes then come in they knew full well they were going to be late and were in essence ready to take the non-voting penalty as they had no knowledge prior to the deadline that they'd get a second chance. Whereas if it is extended BEFORE then it is the same for everyone as there is prior notice. Once again it all comes down to this "will they won't they" mentality as to whether hosts accept late votes which has caused numerous discussions in the past.

 

Now I'm not saying Noah is in the wrong as of course real life has to take priority over BJSC and is an exception to most late voting cases and as I say this will be discussed, but I just want to explain how a part of me feels. Maybe it's because we are under a bit of extra strain already this contest and this is the worst contest for us to have issues like this come up! :heehee:

I wasn't trying to attack you Bal, I am very sorry as I didn't know the circumstance! Glad you've decided to stick around, Travis! :D

I didn't see it as an attack it just made me feel very "meh :/" to know that i'd potentially disappointed someone (especially because I had no idea that sending that artist would do so)

 

I know perhaps more than anyone here how shit it feels to have someone send a song from an artist you really want to send (yes bringing that up again) so it is literally the LAST thing I would want to do to someone else knowingly.

 

But anyway, I haven't even heard the song that has been sent but I LOVED the other song by them that I was trying, so I hope this one is just as good ;o

And now i've tried to send something that was sent LAST CONTEST :lol:!!!! That REALLY shows how much attention i've paid to this place in the last month or so :')

 

I'll re-re-confirm in time :cool: :cool:

Bal if you sent the one I think you did, the other is WAYYYY better!!

Bal if you sent the one I think you did, the other is WAYYYY better!!

I still prefer the one I was going to send but having listened to this one, it's v good too! New hot band for sure (if we're all on about the same thing that is :kink:)

 

I HAVE A NEW NEW ENTRY ANYWAY MY MID-LIFE BJSC CRISIS SHOULD BE OVER. Resubmitting now a Goldroom-esque number ~

Oh yea Taahino is going rap w/ our back up :angel:

Oh yea Taahino is going rap w/ our back up :angel:

:blink: :blink: :blink:

 

I fear for you sometimes

 

-

 

Anyway, going with my second foreign language entry this year, and the first to qualify!

Rap *.*

:) :) :)

I hope Noah is allowed to enter again btw. I understand the rules and all but certainly think the circumstances at play here make it worthy of exercising a little more discretion considering he did put in the effort to submit votes and he did have the intention to vote on time. (I'm still a bit uneasy about the penalty for late accepted votes being the same as no votes at all though, especially when the person in question was in the final, it just means that on top of all the usual penalty, they also get to knock their own song even further down with their own votes! :lol:)

I have confirmed an entry which is perhaps the most NU-ALTYR I've gone all year.

Gone for a festival inspired anthem from an act I saw at the weekend which completely blew my socks off *.*

either going Portuguese 60's pyschedelic, German 60's choral choir, 70's Greek gorgeous whispery ballad, a coupla years old alternative gay pop track or an indie duet in the style of Nancy & Lee about smoking...

 

place your bets.... :lol:

Just to air the other side of the argument for Noah's issue - I'm not taking one side or another until we've discussed it internally which we will (but it may take a while for reasons Phil referred to yesterday) - but the revamped rules thread went up just last contest and we really did ask for it to be read carefully, see the subtitle right now. It is slightly annoying that this sort of thing happens just weeks afterwards, but of course accidents do happen.

 

This rule in question has been in place for years now with no issue towards it. What members have had issues towards have been us mods a) changing the rules during the middle of a contest and b) not enforcing some of the rules strictly enough. We wanted the new rules thread to be a clean slate, make sure everything was properly enforced (as for example we've been a bit lenient on who is banned and who isn't before, more out of forgetting who voted when than anything) - just as will be the case with the new veto framework arriving for BJSC 89. Now we are being asked to go against the two things some people have been annoyed at us about: not enforcing one of the rules and changing the rules mid-contest. It really is like we can't win sometimes.

 

The reason for the difference in rules I believe is that if a deadline is extended AFTERWARDS, if any votes then come in they knew full well they were going to be late and were in essence ready to take the non-voting penalty as they had no knowledge prior to the deadline that they'd get a second chance. Whereas if it is extended BEFORE then it is the same for everyone as there is prior notice. Once again it all comes down to this "will they won't they" mentality as to whether hosts accept late votes which has caused numerous discussions in the past.

 

Now I'm not saying Noah is in the wrong as of course real life has to take priority over BJSC and is an exception to most late voting cases and as I say this will be discussed, but I just want to explain how a part of me feels. Maybe it's because we are under a bit of extra strain already this contest and this is the worst contest for us to have issues like this come up! :heehee:

Thanks for your response, Ryan, and to the other mods too for considering my case. I appreciate all the thought and effort that goes into these rules to enforce timely participation in a system that's made to be as fair as possible. I think the mods here do a fantastic (and often thankless) job to keep things running so smoothly, and you're right that I should've read up properly on the new rules. Sorry that I didn't.

 

I do understand the distinction made between an extension announcement before and after the original deadline, but I still think that that's not as important a point to focus on as the obvious effort, interest and willingness to participate of a person voting late (prior to the host's new deadline of course). Yes, as it was reaching midnight I did realise I wouldn't be able to vote on time and would thus face a ban if Lotti didn't extend, but because she did I had the valuable time needed to submit votes as intended and, as I'd mistakenly understood, avoid being banned. I just personally don't think it matters much whether the person had briefly accepted their fate or not with regard to getting a second chance after midnight, rather than being saved by the host before. If they go to the trouble of listening, organising and sending their votes in the grace period specified by the host, they're clearly keen participants who take the contest seriously. Taking their late votes as entirely valid yet deducting their entry significantly AND banning them from taking part next month strikes me as excessively harsh!

 

I trust what you say about this rule being present for years but I'm really surprised that there haven't been issues towards it, though I can't even recall any specific late voters who were then banned myself. I always understood that it was up to the host and his/her schedule to accept late votes, and that if they were accepted the country would face a deduction as penalty, and could enter the following month. I'd definitely have spoken up sooner about the ban in these cases had I known, because I really do think that's overboard.

 

I realise that if the ban for late votes was removed like I'm suggesting, people should be discouraged from banking on a host accepting late votes and 'using' the extended deadline, and that's why I think a slightly larger deduction being applied would be appropriate. It'd mean the person is punished once instead of twice for simply not organising themselves on time. As I said before, in the case of DNQ countries voting late, I think their effort to participate should be emphasised over their escape from penalty. I also feel the risk of "will they won't they" is considerable discouragement from deciding to leave voting until after midnight anyway. Basically, I don't foresee a change in behaviour with what I've proposed, unless I'm missing something! All I see is a fairer response to a case like mine.

 

Thanks again for your consideration!

 

either going Portuguese 60's pyschedelic, German 60's choral choir, 70's Greek gorgeous whispery ballad, a coupla years old alternative gay pop track or an indie duet in the style of Nancy & Lee about smoking...

 

place your bets.... :lol:

omg go for the last one i think i know EXACTLY what that is! was it uploaded to youtube on jun 7 2011???

Gone back for some island vibes this contest!

If I wasn't on an aircraft over Afghanistan I'd try and find examples but we have blocked late voters before.

 

We always try to be fair and reasonable, all we ask is that you do the same with us. I will move heaven and earth for y'all but I need to know that I need to do so!!!

I was actually doing some math and since Noah voted late, he should have gotten the 15% deduction, but the scoreboards say he got the full 33% deduction?

 

I mean... if we're gonna leak stuff, might as well do it now. Cor Lupus. Where the drama happens.

I was actually doing some math and since Noah voted late, he should have gotten the 15% deduction, but the scoreboards say he got the full 33% deduction?

 

I mean... if we're gonna leak stuff, might as well do it now. Cor Lupus. Where the drama happens.

 

The deduction is only 15% if the deadline is extended prior to the original deadline, so Noah being deducted 33% was correct under the current rules.