One of our esteemed members, Spyros (what a cool name!), had asked about creating a thread regarding this very subject title. I took the liberty of starting one.
We, the admin team, first need to remind folks to concentrate on this year's Idol contest based on the current processes, rules, and guidelines that are in place, Bearing that in mind, I feel it might not hurt to have members offer their own perspectives about any guidelines they might feel being too strict, or too lenient, or perhaps the wording of the current rules can be modified somehow, or extra regulations ought to be adopted, or the process of any aspect of the contest can be justifiably altered for the better, or any other viewpoint members might feel would be helpful and beneficial to next year's SPI09 contest.
As with any topic thread, we, the admin team, command respectable, intelligent, mature input about this subject. We recognize that not everyone agrees, from year to year, how this contest is being executed in one way or another. Times have seen modifications made based on common concerns in the past, to some degree or another, or some ideas never become adopted at all.
If a member provides some really constructive ideas that has viability to it, then obviously the interest might be there for possible adaptation, should Ian agree to it as this is his contest and he is the overseer of this competition.
So again, don't get too distracted about next year's Idol and remain focused on SPI08, and add any ideas for next year without any potentially offensive rants or intonations that will cause any uncomfortable stir. If I see that happening, I will personally lock this puppy up and the contributing offenders will get a whippin' with my cat o' nine' tails (aka 'notice of reprimand').
Please be respectful at all times, my friends. And stay focused on this year's contest along the way! Things are getting closer to finality; should be interesting!
Roger Foucault My website: {{Click URL Link}} Co-Admin of "Self Publisher Association" Facebook group (aka 'SPAF') located here: {{Click URL Link}}
Join our SPAF CHAT nights every Monday night, 8 p.m. Eastern Standard time!!
not so much a suggestion, as a question. is there some way to make contestants understand the veto system? i understood it very clearly in 07, but it seems like every year, people get confused and or upset with vetoes. it's not just getting votes that wins the contest, but also showing the judges that you can take critisizm, and make changes, demonstrate a level of professionalism. (if not spelling) lol make deadlines, demonstrate good sportsmanship, thats part of what i always thought the veto system was to enforce. as well as overall quality. plenty of so so projects can get enough votes to move on, but if you aren't able to demonstrate quality, and professionalism, you may get vetoed. maybe the veto system should be more prominant in the contest rules, to avoid (or attempt to avoid) some of the yearly complaints
I'll echo what I said in an earlier post, before the crash. I think that maybe the second round should be by votes, then in the third round, everyone that made it should send their pages and let the judges vote on which projects move on to round 4. With a veto system like this in place, I really don't see what the purpose of the voting is. Sure, it's advertising your project, but, it seems to me, all the voting is really for is for advertising Dimestoreproductions
.com and the contest itself. If the decision were made only by the judges, you could still have a week or two for the projects to show their marketing skills and show that they are listening to the judges by showing improvements and extra pin-ups and such. I really feel that people forget this is small press. Like I said before, most of us have many responsibilities and doing comics is, for now at least, what we do in our spare time. And if any of the other creators are like me, there isn't a lot of spare time there. I really feel like I could have dedicated a lot more time to my actual project had I not been busting my hump trying to get new voters and trying to make sure the other voters kept coming back, all of which, in my eyes at least, was nothing more than a waste of time. I think having a judges only vote in round 3 would help the contest by giving creators more time to perfect their projects while still showing marketing skills and getting people to the website to see their projects. Anyhoo, that's my two cents worth. Lee
The voting, very simply, is the same concept that American Idol uses. Getting the fans to vote, repeatedly, gets the fans to invest their hopes and dreams for good stuff to come into supporting a project. That support WILL TRANSLATE into long term fans for each project, even the ones that don't win. The vote is HUGELY important not just to Dimestore so we can keep DOING the contest year after year, but to each project trying to develop a fan base that cares enough about it to follow it through thick and thin.
I will be very hard pressed to be convinced otherwise...I have seen it work. For books that didn't end up at Dimestore, and some that did. The same reason my wife bought Rubin Studdard's piece of junk first album because she voted for the guy so many times, is the reason voting structure will be hard for me to see a reason to change. Every project out there needs to LEARN the value of that voting - win or lose. Ian Shires, CEO P.O. Box 214 Madison, OH 44057
Why, thank you Roger, my name is really cool, because I am from the coolest island in Greece, Corfu!
But let's stick to the thread. First of all, with what we have right now, the veto system is usefull, and has a really important place in the Idol. The Idol's judges, (accepted as a judging group by all and any contestant who agreed with the terms of this contest in the beginning) are supposed to have more experience and knowledge than most of contestants/fans who get themselves involved in each year's SPI. Therefore, it is their duty to underline any important pro stuff that any voted project may lack at any Round. They serve an Editor's role, they are in a position to accept or not each "submission". Plus, the veto system was part of the rules in the first place as well.
And now we come to my big BUT.
I disagree with the voting system not generally (actually I disagree in general as I said a long time ago, it's not a creator's job hunting for readers but an editor's/publisher'
s, BUT since we talking for Small Press, and SELF publishing, the X creator/team doesnt really have any other editor than himself, so he must do everything alone.)
I think that the voting system must take place only in Round 2. Why? Let me elaborate:
Round one is the large pool, where everyone can show their project with or without the proper qualifications. The judges will scan these projects, and they will set a general standard for next Round. From Round 1, several projects will be qualified to move on, with or without cute fluffy animals among their character's cast. What Round 2 asks from the contestants, are mostly visual things: character profiles, a logo, action poses etc. The potential reader, already has a general opinion, of what it would be a good reading for him, from Round 1. Round 2 helps him to create a more specific image in his mind about his favorite project, or/and take a closer look to the other remaining projects as well, something a little difficult in Round 1, with so many other entries around. So this potential reader, can easily choose, and votefor his favorite projects. We agree 'till here.
And here comes Round 3. A round that requires 3 sequential pages as an addition to previous stuff and samples from each project. The ones that moved on Round 3 dont really show anything new to the reader: he already know what to except, characters, a basic premise, the artist's skills and the writer's stlye (easily detected from any previous text). What he's not familiar with yet, is the team's ability to use all the clues to create a comic page. Pacing, breakdowns, dialogue, ... Things that, and here is my bigger point, they are not so easy detected by a fan's perspective:
We have 3 pages. 3 pages can't tell anything about the story itself, or of how the final comic will look like. U may have 3 pages full of action and then nothing, u may want to show the comic's origin in those 3 pages, but this way fans wont see anything from the good stuff, fights, intrigue, love scenes, flying penguins or twisted plans that only the project's creators up till this moment knows that will blow our minds out.
When a publisher asks for submissions, they never ask for less than at least 5 pages (and a cover, a pitch, a resume and how this ends and in how many issues). Because they cant tell if this X entry is ready for publication by just 3 pages.
Now let's put in use my marketing experience About the argument for the fanbase's extension: statistically, only a 20-25% will actually buy the comic he votes for. Voting and being part of a FREE contest is fun and relaxing for after a long day's hard work. But buying it, it's a completely different process. And if we add the fact that they wont find this in front of their eyes in a comic shop things gets more complicated.
Round 3 is a Judges'round. They have the ability to tell by these 3 pages, not if the final comic will actually be good or not, but, if the artist can draw, if the writer has a connection with the rest of the team, if the inker is inking for a b&w comic or for a soon-to-be colored version.
And let's not forget the final Round, where we also have a different style of voting, by buying the comic!
So: Round1 judges, Round2 voting, Round3 judges (let me add that Round 3 is a really important round, and u dont want to mess with the results, that's the veto's purpose till now, but WITHOUT the voting at all u wont have the fan's dissapointement as well, a really excused dissapointement when he logs EVERY day to vote).)
You can also increase the pages to 5 in Round3, and create a second jugding stage, a level 2 of more judges who their votes will count as the 40% of the Major Judge's Votes to the final result.
SEA, Wow, that eerily echoes a suggestion I had to Ian about adding an additional voting round BEFORE public voting were to begin.
Since I'm still a participant in the contest and I should be doing script edits rather than suggestions, I'm going to wait until Round 4 ends to share my thoughts, which are based on several years as a "viewer" and now two years as an actual contestant. So far I think there are some important points being raised and that someone should kick on the beacon to get Ed back to reiterate his suggestion as well.
Oh, and if your part of the 20% planning to buy Spud #0, please tell a friend so we can get to 40% sales. See more Spud at: http://www.advofspud.com/
*kicks on Ed Signal...wraps up in trenchcoat on rooftop to wait....smokes a cigar-koffkoffkoff-
maybe not.....considers retirement....thinks of Sarah...and the rest is... confusing.*
it's not just getting votes that wins the contest, but also showing the judges that you can take critisizm, and make changes, demonstrate a level of professionalism. (if not spelling) lol make deadlines, demonstrate good sportsmanship, thats part of what i always thought the veto system was to enforce. as well as overall quality. plenty of so so projects can get enough votes to move on, but if you aren't able to demonstrate quality, and professionalism, you may get vetoed.
Hi; I'm going to get in my feelings on the voting system/vetoes now--while things are still open for Geek-Girl, and so what I'm saying can't be misconstrued as sour grapes.
GG went from 6th to 7th when Tokyo Gonzo got raised into the Top 3. At the moment GG has two votes to bump another contestant over it, knocking it below the MVA cover line--whether that happens or not will be dependent on Keith's vote.
These are my feelings on why--within the ideals of the veto system--Geek-Girl deserves to be in, and should remain in, the MVA cover slot.
wrote ... it's not just getting votes that wins the contest, but also showing the judges that you can take critisizm, and make changes,
The judges' criticisms of our Round 3 entry were the art and that there weren't super-heroics in the pages. We agreed with both criticisms.
No-one in the team was happy with the end result of the pages, and as I've touched on previously, there were various problems at the artist's end that lead to that. So to get the project into the shape we wanted it to be in, going forward, we mutually agreed for the artist to step down, and for Sally the colorist to take over the role of artist, in addition to her existing role as the project's colorist--and we are now completely happy with the pages.
The lack of tights & capes: I wanted those to be in the #0 issue, but as the book was 12 pages, half the size of a regular comic, I wanted to make sure I had room to make the origin play out naturally. That was all I felt there was room to do, but in the back of mind, I did feel it was missing something, not having that element in there; I think I just needed an outside party to say it.
Two months removed from having originally written the script, I took another look at it and found, with distance, there were bits that could be cut, allowing room to comfortably get the super-hero stuff in there. And, now with the script revised, it's firing on all cylinders and showcases the GG concept in a way that I'm satisfied with.
So I feel we've covered the quality and professionalism bases. And as for the level of votes, those speak for themselves.
Spyros: So you're suggesting for Round 3 that FIVE sequential pages should be made to better encapsulate a project's worth, to give the creator and his/her team a better opportunity to produce panels and story context in line with what some publishers ask for?
This implementation would require more time allotted for this round if that option was adopted. It takes time to assemble sequential pages, especially dynamic ones in vying for round approval and ascension in the ranking. Not sure how much more time Ian feels this contest needs to be given as it would stretch the contest out even further by one, two, three, or however many more weeks, but Ian would be best suited to respond to this idea.
As for the VETO aspect of this contest, it helps to wean out projects that show less potential than those with much stronger attributes, those with less votes (in both artistic and literary talent). A weaker project (weaker being the overall artistic, conceptual, and/or literary merit) that may have more votes than one with obvious stronger qualities, in other words. The votes help garner fan support, yes, and promotion to the next round(s), but some project creators don't have the same support network that others might have, which comes to the marketing effort that each creator has to provide in acquiring those votes, which is where the VETO comes in to recognize stronger project potential despite a weaker vote count. Votes alone are not a true scientific study of the buying public in this contest. These are fan support gauges. But they are not always the true markers that show real project worth. Obviously we use votes to move entrants from one round to the other, but these alone are still left to scrutiny by us judges through the VETO aspect, ensuring that what we feel are really qualified projects either stay put, get bumped down, or get escalated. It also makes for an exciting detail of this contest because an entrant with a circle of, for example, 200 friends and family voting for his or her property still isn't safe if his/her project is far weaker than an entrant with a stronger property but has less contacts to help raise the vote count.
Some projects may have more votes than others, yes, but the overall analysis of those projects by us, the judges (meaning the evaluation we execute in determining all the aspects of the submission including, but notwithstanding, the vote count, marketing effort, artistic, and literary components), are all weighed carefully before a VETO consideration is ever made. It's a decision-making process that not everyone ("everyone" meaning the contestants) has always unanimously agreed upon but has signed up for, in agreement, when entering this contest from its onset. For this reason a three-way unanimous decision to VETO a project is required so not every veto-nominated project gets escalated, thus bumping another off the list, so to speak.
Bear in mind that contests of any kind have their own processes and guidelines. When people sign up to enter these competitions then they do so in compliance and support of these processes and guidelines. This specific contest has seen some evolutionary steps made in its guideline implementations over the years.
[ Edited Sun Jun 29 2008, 07:34AM ] Roger Foucault My website: {{Click URL Link}} Co-Admin of "Self Publisher Association" Facebook group (aka 'SPAF') located here: {{Click URL Link}}
Join our SPAF CHAT nights every Monday night, 8 p.m. Eastern Standard time!!
This thread is a pretty good idea. Good job Spyros!
My suggestion has to do with the legnth of the voting periods. I like the idea of the public voting but 10 days seemed to be a bit long and the 17 days for round 3 was even more so. As everyone here knows, the amount of work required between voting rounds is considerable. Everyone makes sacrifices in their lives (family, work, etc...) to get this done because it means alot to all of us but if contestants have to spend 1/3 or more of the time in between rounds making sure that everyone votes every day the quality of work turned in will suffer. I think that 7 days would be a good amount of time for the public voting for each round so that teams can spend more time making their project the best that it can be.
Other than that I have to say that the best thought out idea I have seen concerning Idol so far was by Ed. I do hope that he will get back on and post it again.
I disagree that 3 pages is not enough to get an idea of your story across. If you want to tell more story in the space, just make your panels smaller. I feel that figuring out HOW to tell enough of your story in 3 pages is a good lesson to learn, especially in these days of massive story decompression.
I remember on the earlier version of the forum I had suggested that some sort of system be put in place so that Alternates (runners up) could step forward to fill any voids left by entries that did not make their deadlines (rather than potentially leaving holes as the competition moves forward).
I am still a bit confused by the veto process - I think last year if something was vetoed up from a lower bracket it went to the top of the new bracket instead of the bottom - I liked that solution better as if 2 projects happened to veto up as the system stands this year, the second project would replace the first one - wouldn't it? (since this year vetoed up projects seem to be rising to the bottom of the tier they are being vetoed into)
Yes, 5 pages will be a really good deal, and will make things easier for both the judges AND the contestants.
3 pages may work fine for me, since the 90% of published comic space in Greek magazines are 1-4 page long, but for a serialized comic doesnt work the same.
As for the time, the way I see it, it's funny even thinking of the sentence "I dont have time to complete my Round's entry". I may be harsh about this, but small press or not, the winner is expected to publish at least one full 22/24-page story every 1-2 months. That means one page every 3 days at best, and if we talking for a team, that's even easier. So 3 pages (or 5 in that matter) is nothing!
Yes, we all have dayjobs or families, or other things in our lives, but he who really wants this, dedicates a little more of his spare time to do so. Plus, I cant understand why, anyone who decides to participate in this contest, isnt already by a 50% ready for the rounds. Entry or not, we re talking about a comic project, aside the contest, this is something each contestant wants to do anyway, create a series and pitch it to a publisher, so nothing will be wasted. Personally, (I may not be the best of examples since I m working pro in Greece for more than 8 years now) I got the cover ready in 3 days, and by the Round 1's deadline I have finisherd Round 2 AND 3 pencils, and all this in a really busy period, I had a whole exposition to run with 35 artists participating. And media stuff, and dayjob, and school.
About the votes, I agree with you Roger, and it seems that more people think of the same, as well to keep the voting system just for Round 2. =No hard feelings about the veto talks on Round 3+an important Round (3) where the judges' commentaries have more meaning.
I used the old "edit/copy/paste" routine to move this item to the appropriate thread. Look out, world! My two brain cells work, and I know how to use them!
Since Roger opened the discussion about thoughts on how to improve Idol, I wanted to wax philosophic before I repeat my earlier voting suggestion (which I'd also emailed to Ian weeks ago).
Personally, I think the veto is Idol's Achilles' heel. It might be exciting in the short term, generating a thick atmosphere of drama, but It's done nothing but create negative publicity, which has killed participation in '08 and will certainly effect '09.
Now, I'm not saying that the publisher shouldn't consider the publishability of the winning project; I can see why the Powers That Be need to be able to pull the plug on a project that's just not up to par. In that case, the veto should happen BEFORE third-round voting. If you wait until the votes are in and tallied and the No. 1 entry isn't publishable, it's unrealistic to ask a team that's generated the votes and proven its ability to market itself--which is continually touted as one, if not THE, most important part of the Idol contest--to be content with being thrown to the bottom of the heap. And you can shout "It's in the rules!" until you're blue in the face; it isn't going to change how people feel, and they feel humped. They'll poison the well, rules be damned, and there's not much you can do to neutralize the bad publicity.
Part of the problem is the contest's piecemeal progression; that is, a cover and pitch for round 1; characters and logo for round 2; and sequentials for round 3. It's relatively easy for a concept to make it through the first two rounds, but the realities of publishing depend on the round 3 sequentials. "Suddenly" a project that looked hot (or at least promising) comes up a dud. That's when the judges have to get tough and pull the plug; don't even let it go to a vote. Nobody needs the grief and aggravation.
But if you're going to wait until the end of round 3 before you put the stake in a stinker, here's how I'd suggest reworking the voting system:
Each judge gets to assign one point in each round to each project: +1 (yes), 0 (no or pass), -1 (to preserve the judges' veto powers).
Then every 30 online votes (or 200 or 113 or 87 or 43 or 37, pick a number that keeps the playing field realistically level and a three-judge veto hard to override) counts as +1 point, calculated to two decimal places. So, for this example, it takes 30 online votes to negate a judge's -1 point, which adds urgency to the need to market/promote a project.
Anyway, here's how it plays out in an hypothetical final round:
Birdclaw gets one pass from a judge (0 points) and two vetoes (-2), but it gets 230 votes (+7.66). Total score = 5.66
Tazzle's Razzle Dazzle gets a three-way split from the judges (1+0-1=0), but scores big with 195 votes (+6.50). Total score = 6.50
Suicide Spade gets three nods from the judges (+3), but only nabs 100 votes (+3.33). Total score = 6.33
Air Marauders gets two nods and a pass (+2) and 175 votes (+5.83). Total score = 7.83
Clarity gets three nods (+3) and 115 votes (+3.83). Total score = 6.83
Samurai Steakhouse gets three nods (+3) and 110 votes (+3.66). Total score = 6.66
Thus, each judge's assessment of quality, publishability, and marketability is preserved and appropriately weighted AND the voters' voice (reflecting the creators' marketing and promotional efforts) has a tangible influence.
And if you DO change the voting system and eliminate the overt veto talks, I'd promote the living sh*t out of it for Idol '09. "Idol '09! The Year the Veto Vote Died!" That's the only way you'll convince people to get involved and feel good/confident about ponying up the entry fee.
Okay. That's it for now. I return you to your interweb surfing, already in progress. Blog | MySpace
Thanks for bringing this back to the table Ed. I know Ian's doing a "la la la" right now with this thread, but this is the best idea I've heard to update the voting system thus far. See more Spud at: http://www.advofspud.com/
it's not that I'm LA LAing anything, rather, I want to be able to focus on the ideas when I do read them, and I am decidedly unfocused right now. Ian Shires, CEO P.O. Box 214 Madison, OH 44057
Hey Interesting stuff here, I do like the voting system suggestion. I also like the idea of a veto before voting. It's fairly simple and clean, if the pages aren't up to the potential you demoed in Round 2 or are unfinished etc then the Judges should diss/discuss/dismiss at that juncture. I also think the Round 3 vote went on too long, a week at the most would be my preference. oh these pretty things
I was actually surprised that entrants who failed to meet the requirements of Round 3 (i.e. unfinished pages) were not automatically eliminated from voting. After all, deadlines are deadlines and even the glossiest projects need to be able to meet them.
And if this is truly based on the American Idol model the judges weed down to the most likely candidates and then it's votes-only, right? I mean, I haven't watch that particular show in ages but I don't remember the judges being more than commentary once viewer voting was underway. In that case, votes are votes and no veto applies.
But, then, this is why I don't _watch_ American Idol: the masses are not always the best decision makers, buying into hype or sensationalism more than actual talent (especially in those earlier rounds).
Though I don't have anything new to add, here, I do support the idea of judges vetoes, if they must be done, happening before the voting begins for each round. Speaking as a potential contestant next year, I would much rather be nixed at the beginning of a round and know where I stand than to put forth serious marketing muscle only to be told that, despite the votes, someone who did more poorly in that aspect of the challenge is more "deserving". --Scraps
I will third (or fourth) the suggestion that the judges weild their veto votes before the round is opened to public voting. That way no one feels robbed after a month's worth of hard campaigning for a project that the judges probably already knew they were going to veto from the outset.
I somewhat agree with the veto system in place, but that aside the contest needs to be shortened. Fans don't have the attention spans to vote everyday for 4 months or whatever it was (it was so long i can't remember and that's bad) I know that projects have problems with dealines and such, but honestly that's too bad. There should be no excuses especially if you want to ever consider becoming professional. i have a family, a full-time job, and a part-time job and i get my comics out and on time, everytime. Love or hate my books, they're out and i love making them and keep improving because of contests like this one (i've missed one contest deadline and never again will I-Iwas disqualified and i deserved it). There are great suggestions and opinions to help shape the next book. you move on. I also know we have some more solid fans, we may not have gotten the most votes, but we had a lot of voters and thats what counts and should count. I did feel the favoritism in the air if you know what i mean. Just because a team buys a dimestore banner doesn't mean they should automatically be respected and magically have more voters (doesn't work like that in the real world-scratch that sometimes it does). Last but surely not least, solid times and days for when voting begins. Erick and I work our butts off and have crazy hours-that aside we have to remind our fans and voters each round and when we tell them one thing and then it changes it's unprofessional for both of us (meaning dimestore as well) This is why day one of round three we had three votes and then finished in almost 4th and it's 7th i guess now. we had to convince people dimestore is for real and the contest is still running and people started to wake up. WE shouldn't have to do that i should be able to go hey Joe Blow check out my new book on dimestoreproductions
.com, if you like zombies and our story, vote for us. and support indy comics. but it was more like Hey Joe Blow check out my new comic at dimestore make sure you vote once a day everyday and we have no idea when the voting starts or how to explain to you how to vote with ease. I guess if you like zombies you'll figure it out. Over all I did have fun and that's what matters most, i know some of this sounds harsh, but i did honestly enjoy myself and hope to keep in touch with most of the fans and friends made here.
So recap:
1) Shorten contest
2) only one vote per person
3) judges should have no ties to dimestore (if possible)
Some really, really good suggestions here! Thank you, members, for these contributions. Definitely a lot to think about and truly helpful suggestions to consider.
The SPI contest is not modeled completely around American Idol. We need to reiterate this as we have in the past. It has its own flavour, so to speak, such as the addition of a VETO process. It has had its growing pains along the way through the years as Ian continues to modify processes with this contest to try to appeal to everyone, which seems impossible. Regardless, he continues to try to refine this Dimestore event to indeed appease the majority.
So keep the ideas coming, please. We have some strong convictions about the VETO process that deserves to be heard, and I agree with much of what has been mentioned so far. At some point beyond SPI08 these ideas will be sifted through to determine if any changes will be made, what changes will be made (if any), and so forth. Right now this thread is serving as a sounding board, a fact-finding location to see how future SPI contests can be better polished and refined.
I know Ian, and he is a reasonable guy. Right now he has tons on his plate before he can address a lot of what has been discussed here so far so please don't assume he is ignoring this thread. There is a time for him to focus most, if not all of his energies on this topic and right now is not one of them as he is pressed to get this forum completely back to complete, effective functionality, as well as requiring much-needed time with his family.
Continue with your input. Awesome ideas here, people, which makes me super proud to have such dedicated, passionate members in here who aren't afraid to express their views and share their insights.
Roger Foucault My website: {{Click URL Link}} Co-Admin of "Self Publisher Association" Facebook group (aka 'SPAF') located here: {{Click URL Link}}
Join our SPAF CHAT nights every Monday night, 8 p.m. Eastern Standard time!!
SPA-Bits
14,396
Wishing Well
