•   days until the Eurovision Song Contest Final in Malmö!

ESCChat Song Contest - The Future


How should the rules be interpreted in future contests (please read the thread before voting)?

By the host - they won the last edition and can do as they please 2 vote(s) 9.1%
Group - elected by all members 3 vote(s) 13.6%
Group - internally selected 17 vote(s) 77.3%
  1. adamacs RUTH DAVIDSON FOR PM.

    This evening in chat, we came around to the topic of how contests will be organised in future, including eligibility, and application of the rules.

    There is a concern that with JW stepping down, there will be a "power vaccum" and this could lead to a lot more "dramamamamamama".

    With this in mind I suggested an "executive reference group" who would be responsible, not for writing the rule, but interpreting the rules, and ensuring they are applied correctly. The key point is that this group would nt be responsible for running the contest, that would be down to each individual host, but should the host need guidance, or should a dispute arise, this would be looked at by the group, who would make a decision based on the rules.

    The structure I propose is as follows:

    the group will consist of 5 members:
    • 2 members will have participate in one of the first 5 editions
    • 2 members will have participated in at least 10 editions
    • 1 free member will have participated in at least 3 editions
    Those members who are interested in participating in the group would nominate themselves, and then depending on how we decide to elect them, there will either be a vote, or the members would be selected by another means (JW perhap's as he has done so much to make the contest what it is today).
    Nothing has been decided as yet, but please state your preference in the poll and leave any feedback.
  2. Mina Member with a "past"

    Of course we need a group, someone has to make the decisions. I voted for an internally selected group (jj for me would be the ideal person to choose 5 people since this is his site and he knows us all very well) because not everyone has the same criteria and if all members vote, we could end up with 5 very nice and popular people but who would hesitate making decisions that need to be made.
    As to who should be in that group, in my opinion, it should be 5 of the older members of the site, at least for now.

    I support the idea of the group 100%, but on a few conditions for me:
    I wouldn't like to see 5 members picked who will then stay for more than 3 editions. There has to be rotation. Putting 5 members above others who will then stay there forever would definitely not have my support.
    For me, it's not 100% clear how we will decide who'll be in the group. Let's say 5 people get elected for 27-29 (example), then I don't like the idea of letting all of them take place in the group for 30-32, if you see what I mean. Different members should get a chance as well.
    If JW wants to choose the group, he can do so. I trust him completely in wanting the best for the contest. I don't think he would ever choose based on who he likes and who he dislikes.

    I chose the 2nd option, since for me it wasn't clear who was meant with 'internal selection' - if this is JW, then yes. If this is someone else, then no.

    I think it is absolutely necessary for the contest to have someone supervising it. A host cannot do it all by him-/herself, it would cause drama if only one person gets to decide everything.
    JW has made this contest to where it is now, one of (if not THE) best online. We should try to keep it that way.
    Lilly.., pepepaez, Merjan and 3 others like this.
  4. Julio STRANGLES

    I agree with Nick
  5. Sounds good to me, both what Adam and Nick said, even though I will be sad having JW away :(

    I also agree with Nick, although I would think that was alternative 3 (which is how I've voted). Maybe, therefore, we need some clarification of the voting options, and probably above all, if the selection would be made by jw or other person(s).

    I'm afraid I don't understand what a "free member" is. Perhaps Adam could explain that?

    I also agree with the comment jw made in chat that he should/would still have overall authority over the contest and would be able to override the committee's decisions if he felt it necessary.

    However, I feel I must take exception to the statement, also made in chat, that "old" members (i.e. people who have been members from the early days of the site) "care more" about the contest and that newer members don't and, therefore, should not be able to be part of this committee (I am using the term committee for ease). In my experience (as, it has to be said, a newer member), some of the "older" members seem to treat the contest (and possibly the site itself) with a certain amount of disdain, whereas there are several newer members who, I feel sure, have only the best interests of the contest, the site and, implicitly, jw, at heart. Perhaps, therefore, the structure proposed by Adam, might (need to) be modified.
    NickEmpel and MagicGianluk like this.
  7. Gian My avatar is fat and frumpy

    I think the idea is good,but in my opinion the host has to decide. We certainly need a group but we can't make only one group forever. However,as Mina said,if we chose the group internally it will be a good thing,but in my opinion some people might get offended,and this is not what we want. In conclusion i think that the idea of the group is good,but we should let decide the host to the people who he/she wants to nominate.
  8. jw HI. I'M ADAM SCOTT.

    Comments like that made us end up with David Cameron.
    Scheeples and Merjan like this.
  9. Mina Member with a "past"

    Ok, let me rephrase what I said in chat.
    I never said newer members don't care. Gian, for example, loves the contest and he's very faithful to the site and he's one of the newest members here.

    What I meant (but admittedly I didn't explain in detail) was that a/ older members have stuck around for years so they're more likely to not disappear all of a sudden, b/ older members know the structure of the site and most of the people here much better than new members and that could help if a conflict needed to be solved and c/ older members have already been involved in many conversations about the contest throughout the years i.e. they'll be more experienced to handle a problem.

    Most of all, this contest was started as something between a few close friends...over time it expanded to include more people and some of those people became a big part of the contest (for example james and nick and adam are considered old members of the site by now even though nick 1st participated in the 14th edition and james and adam in the 16th). The same will happen with other people, too..but it takes some time for newer members to be familiar with the site and its dynamics. That's why I said for now I think the group should consist of older members.

    I could explain in more details and with examples but I believe everyone understands that for a newer member, for example, it would be hard to judge the participation in the contest of someone they barely know but who, for us older members, may be a close friend who just happened to be away for a while..it has nothing to do with whether the new member loves the site or the contest etc...it's just a matter of being here long enough to have an opinion on some things/people.
    MagicGianluk and Luis DLC like this.

    when i read the rotation thing i thought: why not a proper democracy, elections for the members every x editions?
    and then i thought that that would cause troubles, we would get into politics!
    so if we assure that members will change that will be a good thing. but i also support a scenario where a trustful person who agrees to stay has the chance to do so until he wants to stop it, dont you? why would we change a person who is doing well and wants to keep doing it?
  11. Mina Member with a "past"

    Nessie, it would be too much work for just one person..and a very big responsibility...also that one person might need to be away for a while and what then? Not to mention that some people might say he/she is favouring certain people etc. That's why we need a group..so the decisions (and the blame if things get to that and we all know they often do) will be shared. 3 people at the very least in my opinion.

    that person wont take all the work, mina. its just how you said, but with some permament people that want to stay and people want them to stay. we decide that, not that person..
  13. NickEmpel BURGER AND FRIES

    I absolutely do not like the idea of permanent people.
    The era we had now, with JW, it was fine to have one person coordinating it all. He is the owner and creator of the site, so it was fine for him to take the role of supervisor on his own.
    Now, I do not think that regular participants in the contest should be put above all the others permanently. That will cause other people to feel like they are less than others. That is why I think that everyone who wants to join the group, should get a chance and be there for a maximum of 3 editions. I simply don't think that if we elect (or let someone, for example JW, elect the group) one permanent group, it would go well for a long time.
  14. Julio STRANGLES

    well, the group should be made by jw in my opinion, the fact of making 2 of the old and 1 of the new should not be made, and it should be up to jw to decide the group based on the best for the site and contest because it is still part of the site. i would say 5 is to much it should be 4 + host and there are many things to talk about still, for example why so many people cause if they are to work on contest they would need to know the results before they are announced and we obv know some people are gossiper and that to many people = leakage of the results or information before the time. it should be a group yes but what is the function of each member? and will there be only one knowing the results (the best in my opinion) and who will decide who is the one to know the results? and what will the others do if they don't know the results? there are many things that must be talked and its not just 'lets make a group' there are questions that must be made before making any decision like 'who will be responsible for knowing the results to avoid leakage' 'who will decide who will that be' 'what are the function of the other members' and many many other and remember making a 5 specific members from determinate times like 'from1st 5 editions' etc will make us sound like we are on a dictatorship where the 1st have more privilege then the new ones, it should be based on what is best for the contest and not what is best for the members or old members or new member. it has to be really talked still. you wanted my opinion more then 'i agree with nick' there you go :P
    Lilly.., pepepaez and Merjan like this.

    Thank you for taking the trouble to explain, Mina.

    However, yes, as far as I recall, you did say newer members don't care.

    Of course the older members who have stuck around have stuck around. That goes without saying, but I don't see that it necessarily follows that someone who has recently joined is more likely to disappear. For some people this is undoubtedly the case (as it no doubt was for some people who joined long ago) but for others it would not be. Furthermore, there are certain people who appear regularly in the contest who, to my mind, have not "stuck around", they have most certainly disappeared, and just pop up for each contest. They regularly appear in other places frequented by site members, but not on the site itself, and that seems, to me, to be not in the spirit of the competition. I know I have only been a member for three and a half months, but there is one member in particular who has appeared in chat this week for the first time since I have been here, and yet they have regularly participated in the contests. There has often been lots of chat about whether they should, but they usually do.

    The site (quite rightly in my opinion) claims to have the greatest ESC contest and it seems to me that this could not be the case if it were merely something held between a few close friends. The scale of it, underpinned of course by jw's technical wizardry, is what has made it what it is. You, Mina, in particular, have been especially vocal (if one can be vocal in text) about how the technical standard of contests will fall once jw stops producing the shows, and yet, if you only want a song contest between a few close friends, clearly the quality of the production (or, indeed, the need for a production at all) is immaterial. Just listen to the songs and vote. This is patently not merely a song contest between a few close friends.

    I fully understand that the Rules state core founding members of escChat.com and other members of value may be allowed to participate, but, again, I don't see why the fact that they might be a particular friend of someone gives them the right to take part when, to all intents and purposes they can't be bothered to show up in chat at all at other times. They are simply exploiting (past) connections. By all means stay friends with people, chat on MSN, Twitter, facebook, Myspace, whatever, but don't use it as an excuse to keep open the competition to people who have long-since moved on.

    So, in that case, I guess I'm agreeing with you that it would be hard for (me as) a newer member to judge whether they should participate but, in my opinion, certain of these people are just taking advantage of the goodwill of the site.
  16. NickEmpel BURGER AND FRIES

    Julio makes a great point here. We are talking about a group of 5, but I definitely think the host should be part of it. So I agree with 4 members (or 2 members, for a smaller group) + host.
    Then the point of knowing results. I think this should be restricted to the host? The group would only be there to coordinate it and make decisions when necessary, or am I wrong?
    It's definitely impossible that all five people in the group know the results, if you ask me.
    Merjan likes this.

    Sorry, but this post went on while I was writing the reply to Mina.

    I totally agree. I still think jw would be best to decide the make-up of at least the first group. (Maybe after that we might be able to manage it ourselves.) I think some of us need to stop and remember that this is his site. To rephrase Harry Truman, The buck stops with him. Not only for the contest of course, but for everything that happens across the site.

    Maybe only now is it becoming more obvious to people all the responsibility he has shouldered single-handedly for the last two years, as well as physically producing the shows. He needs a break and we need to get our arses in gear!

    For what it's worth, I actually think it would be a good idea to have someone stay on in the group, not necessarily permanently, but so you don't have completely new members all at the same time and so someone (hopefully) knows what they are doing.
    Lilly.. likes this.

    I agree with Nick (sorry jw :P)
  19. adamacs RUTH DAVIDSON FOR PM.

    Just to clarify on what I had meant as the role of the group. They would not be running the contest this would be the host and would not therefore know the results. Their purpose would be to interpret the rules in the case of a dispute. In an ideal world, they would be figure-heads and never have to be involved, but unfortunately we do not live in an ideal world.
  20. Julio STRANGLES

    i still think it should be up to jw decide who they are and not based on rules of being on contest for long or not cause we obv know some people dont give a damn, plus if a bad host comes and does not know how to work with the results etc, there should be a member of the group capable of helping there for one of the members should know the results for safety reasons
    Merjan likes this.

Like this page on Facebook

Comments posted on the forum and in the chat room are the sole opinion of the respective author and not escChat.com.
escChat.com © 2009 – 2023