hmm
How interesting.
I'm always seeing some of the same people winning WOTW.
I'm not questioning their worthiness. None of this before you think hahaha
If the person did it and deserves it, it's more than certain to win and always if that's the case...
But what's interesting is how often they appear.
I need to get the data better and look at @calumam's time if there was any kind of repetition like this on the same frequency.
Again I say. I'm just looking into it and I ended up realizing it. Maybe you can even answer me better, because I believe you must have realized much sooner than me hahahahah
Ha ha, I had the same doubt but when I see the work of these users, I have no doubt, most of them are professional and extraordinary writers, it's very hard to compete with them but that doesn't mean we should not try, I improved my position from bottom 5, lol 😁. The best part of POB-wotw contest is the challenges it brings with it and it definitely improves our writing and creativity. Keep trying friend, I am sure we all make it to the winning list someday, even if not, lol, participating itself is a win in other ways too. Congratulations to all the winners, @d-pend is the big surprise, a gifted artist, he definitely raised the standards now and my friend @mineopoly, this guy will be always in the winners list, what's his secret 🤔
Here's my way of facing the assignment:
A. Click bait title
B. Don't screw up the grammar or writing (include writing structure)
C. Make the format look pretty and easy to read
D. Try to find a personal image that is real to you (preferable something you make or caught on your camera.)
E. Give them something to chew on
F. Beginning, middle and twist
G. Think about the topic a few days
H. Make it funny and alive
I. Grab the audience with a personal or at least relatable story
J. Include your own art or at least artistic perspective
K. Make the reader feel good
L - O. AVOID
This comment, here! 💯I do spend a good few days each week researching around the topic at hand and mulling over ideas in my head, playing with scenarios, storylines etc BEFORE I hit "create post". Then I draft it all out and revisit it a few times to edit, refine etc before finally submitting it. Complete respect to the WOTW admins and reviewers. It can't be an easy task and it must take a lot of time. If anyone wants to improve their writing, the best thing to do is to write regularly, challenge yourself and when entering WOTW, analyse your feedback from prior weeks against the merit grading system, and look at where you are falling short. I do this as there is always room for improvement and I have a long way to go. Then I check through against the grading system after I have written, to make sure I have hit the mark wherever it is possible within the constraints of my genre and perspective. I know there is an area for example that I can do more in: informative. This pops up time and again for me as a lower score and I know it's because I am primarily writing creative short stories and poetry, but I am hoping to weave more informative elements into my stories going forwards; if I feel it will detract from the perspective or creativity though, I will make do without it :-) Congrats to everyone who took the time to enter the contest and to the winners. I have been away for the long weekend in the UK since Thurday and only just arrived back home, so catching up. Keep writing everyone, I'm off to read the few WOTW entries that hadn't been posted before I left for the weekend, including the winning post which I am really excited to read! Have a great week everyone :-)
Look at this. More free advice:
That's how I followed it when I participated in the beginning. It worked quite well for me.
Sometimes I feel sorry for you judges. It would be nice to have more support from the whales. At the same time it is clear that the contest is supported well in POB upvotes. Even if you don't win you find a pretty fat upvote. There is reasoning in all writing about one word. If we choose the right word and there is enough specific information and links we may target potential key word rankings.
That's pretty impressive 👍. Winning Secrets from the best. 😊🙏
@wiseagent, @hranhuk, @mineopoly, @vikbuddy, @samsmith1971, @corporateay
I've been thinking about you guys. Let me know what you think. It should clear things up a bit more. It's an update to the public merit system @Calumam developed. It's a lot of work to grade in this manner, but I'll do it for at least the next couple of weeks to give everyone an idea of how we get the grading done.
It's also a justification for why I reward higher for the contests. I've asked trostparadox to give me his input on the process. He stands apart from the contest.
I know, I know guys. No one asked me to do this, but things are a bit more stable in my life at this time. It's how Calumam wanted things done anyway.
wow! so what I can see from the link is a personalised response to each person on each grading element as well as an engagement value. Am I correct in my understanding? Sounds like a lot of extra work but will really provide exceptional value in feedback to everyone who takes part especially if there is complete transparency of comments across all entrants for everyone to see. I hope the engagement portion doesn't stop some from engaging on other's posts as it boosts other's scores vs theirs. It won't stop me lol as engagement on other's posts is just as important to me as on my own; it was just a slightly cynical thought lol as the margins have been very tight amongst the placed entries and we wouldn't want an engagement score to inadvertently serve to reduce engagement. Perhaps the engagement score should also require meaningful engagement by contestants on at least a couple of other WOTW entries too, to negate any potential for an unintended drop in engagement?
The engagement section is new and experimental. It requires me to check on posts at least twice during the contest week. The only time you'll get a point removed is if people are engaging in the article, but the author doesn't response to any of them at least once.
For now, I need to keep it simple and directed towards the article. If, however, I wanted to do a bonus round for individual authors, then maybe I could focus on an author's cross-commenting on different articles.
Oh completely understand the time requirement is immense. Just a few thoughts from me ;-)
They are amazing yes! But I'm not upset about not winning. By the way, I've already won a WOTW and I even have NTF of that. I really don't care about winning but about participating and encouraging. I hope you didn't misunderstand what I said before. It was just a question to @scholaris if he had also noticed about it ^^
I noticed too @hranhuk,
It is evidence that there is a need to expand the contest. That is why I invited my friend to join. If pob-wotw is going to last then we are going to need new challenges and at the same time every contestant needs some kind of affirmation and perhaps a little guidance. Last week @nonsowrites also addressed his concerns about those who entered but were not getting high scores. He gave detailed advice that could give some extra points if they were followed. I think that was a good move and that post should be promoted.
Just to add: one of the problems of a merit system is that the best always take the top spot. Except we don't want this competition to be based on merit, then we might see something different.
We are also trying to factor in other things so the ratings aren't solely based on the quality of the post but also the quality of engagement. It is a work in progress.
This was the point I wanted to get to!
WOTW is a total success!
With the magnitude of the "event" many people are engaged in the contest. But when it starts to be the same winners, will others continue to be motivated to win?
Taking advantage and answering here @scholaris
That was my long-term concern. The motivation. I cannot speak for myself. I will always write and participate, even if I never make it to the top 5 hahaha
But what about the others? How will they see this?
That's why I once suggested a voting stand for everyone who participates in WOTW (or any other official pob contest). Where all participants who fit within the rules and have a "minimum specific score" of the classification will receive good votes from the POB (a fixed amount for everyone), but I know that for this I would have to have support from other whales in the contest and responsibility for this. Which at the moment I don't see being possible. We would have to wait to gather more POBs and have other accounts that really want to help with this curation ;)
A voting stand or a minimum curation based upon scoring. I've been playing with that idea at a certain price range and score. Given the level of scrutiny we publicly give the articles, it's definitely doable. However, I won't do that for every article at this time.
One problem with the concept is that everyone has their own definition of minimum. Also, one person's high quality article could be low quality in someone else's eyes and vice versa. People are going to vote how they wish with their stake.
The score would be minimal from the contest rules. Regardless of the taste of each type of person.
And the total amount of winnings will vary depending on the taste of each person voting. What I mean by having a "minimum" vote would be from the support account for the curation of the contest.
Now what each person votes and how much they want to vote is not the case. You understand?
There's no support account at this time. I definitely understand what you mean by a minimum, though.
Wow, that's good to hear. Keep it up friend, I liked your recent curation report, you are really doing amazing work. 😊👍. !PIZZA
@hranhuk! I sent you a slice of $PIZZA on behalf of @vikbuddy.
Learn more about $PIZZA Token at hive.pizza (4/10)
Thanks!
!LUV
<><
@vikbuddy, you've been given LUV from @hranhuk.
Check the LUV in your H-E wallet. LUV changes soon. (1/1)
You and @corporateay are the first in my memory to voice these concerns. Corporateay questioned his performance. You, with regards to the recurring winners.
@Calumam set the merit bases and I defined them early on in the contest history. He never set a restriction on recurring winners. I believe the reason was that if someone continually performs well and scores high, they should be rewarded. Do you have a specific example of someone who continually appears on the winner's list? Also, have you compared their articles against others who may not have done as well?
AMR provided me with data I requested on the entire contest earlier this morning. The intent would be to evaluate all of the contests in the WOTW and check out things like:
I've presented such data on a weekly basis already, but not for the ENTIRE contest's history. It will take a bit to sift through all the data. It's about 4-5 months worth.
If you wish to look at things, I welcome it. I'd love to see an outside perspective of the contest. I put the weekly statistics out there expressly for this purpose.
I'm a very observant person hahaha
But my questioning is not because I find something wrong. None of that. just really noticed
As for @calumam's time, I didn't look at anything. I've just followed the last few weeks since his absence.
And I agree with the point that if someone is always writing good texts, they should always win. It's that person's credit for their performance.
I myself, at the beginning of everything, had told @calumam that I wasn't trying to win. Since my time is short and mainly the engagement that was one of the pillars to win at the time among publications was very difficult for me to achieve due to time.
But, I was helping to spread the "word" and the contest so that more people could see and more contestants came in to make it bigger and bigger ;)
When I asked you if you had noticed it was exactly because you have more data and statics and if this could have made you notice and if this could end up causing you some kind of annoyance
I definitely noticed. I didn't take anything negative from what you wrote nor would I. I will always be encouraging with a questioning attitude. We can't find problems if we don't communicate. So, if you have questions, please feel free to ask. Only together can we improve the platform.
The merit grading is an objective response to the subjective process of curation. It aims to level analysis of a user's article across the board. Everyone gets graded along a line of strict criteria. It works to align curators to a set standard. It's also leads to your observation of the recurring winners situation.
I want to reward everyone for their efforts in the weekly rewards, but if I prevent authors with the highest grades from winning, because they won before, then I negate Cal's merit grading. It's an idea I toyed with before realizing the potential consequences.
The next step for me to take, then, is to utilize data analysis to evaluate the process entirely. The evaluation will look at the highest award winners, their articles, and the consistency of their grading...perhaps more. Where do I go from here?
@AMR has been doing some painstaking analysis on the whales of POB. Should I do something similar for those that participate in the WOTW contests? My approach could be that I single out different authors each week and show how I review their articles both alone and against other users. I figured I would start with @corporateay since he was the first to ask. Would you mind this corporateay? I feel this is a natural progression for the contest.