Format for POEM OF THE MONTH?
66.67%
• 14 votes •
A. One winner in a given month, that poet cannot win again in the calendar, and should not be nominated until the next year.
19.05%
• 4 votes •
B. Any poet can win in the given month, and poets can multiple times per year.
14.29%
• 3 votes •
C. Choice A or B with the addendum that least three competitions set aside for new poets and or those with less than 10 wins
Format for POEM OF THE MONTH?
Ahavati said:
You weren't required to. It's something that inadvertently fell through the cracks with the passing of a torch. It will all be sorted with the new host.
It didn’t fall through the cracks with the passing ... If one is going to nominate then the nominator should take on the responsibility, and courtesy, of contacting the nominee to make sure they’re fine with having their work on a larger platform; especially if it wins and then is placed on the DUP Facebook page.
I agree with the aforementioned in that most will view a nomination as an honor, so a PM might not be necessary; but when in doubt contact the author.
You weren't required to. It's something that inadvertently fell through the cracks with the passing of a torch. It will all be sorted with the new host.
It didn’t fall through the cracks with the passing ... If one is going to nominate then the nominator should take on the responsibility, and courtesy, of contacting the nominee to make sure they’re fine with having their work on a larger platform; especially if it wins and then is placed on the DUP Facebook page.
I agree with the aforementioned in that most will view a nomination as an honor, so a PM might not be necessary; but when in doubt contact the author.
LobodeSanPedro said:
It didn’t fall through the cracks with the passing ... If one is going to nominate then the nominator should take on the responsibility, and courtesy, of contacting the nominee to make sure they’re fine with having their work on a larger platform; especially if it wins and then is placed on the DUP Facebook page.
I agree with the aforementioned in that most will view a nomination as an honor, so a PM might not be necessary; but when in doubt contact the author.
Yes; it did. If I failed to tell you that I was personally notifying those who had been nominated, then you didn't know to do it or put it in the guidelines.
What we think people should do is irrelevant when it's not in the guidelines. Not everyone thinks alike.
It didn’t fall through the cracks with the passing ... If one is going to nominate then the nominator should take on the responsibility, and courtesy, of contacting the nominee to make sure they’re fine with having their work on a larger platform; especially if it wins and then is placed on the DUP Facebook page.
I agree with the aforementioned in that most will view a nomination as an honor, so a PM might not be necessary; but when in doubt contact the author.
Yes; it did. If I failed to tell you that I was personally notifying those who had been nominated, then you didn't know to do it or put it in the guidelines.
What we think people should do is irrelevant when it's not in the guidelines. Not everyone thinks alike.
MPAs ... I never understood the need for multiple accounts; so I fully under how some would say MPA accounts can compromise many competitions ... it’s been a long running issue far before POTM.
There are those who handle their MPA accounts with the utmost integrity, and others who crap all over the site under pseudonyms.
In my time here as both member and mod, it’s not affected the majority of competitions.
There are those who handle their MPA accounts with the utmost integrity, and others who crap all over the site under pseudonyms.
In my time here as both member and mod, it’s not affected the majority of competitions.
Ahavati said:
Yes; it did. If I failed to tell you that I was personally notifying those who had been nominated, then you didn't know to do it or put it in the guidelines.
What we think people should do is irrelevant when it's not in the guidelines. Not everyone thinks alike.
No it’s very relevant, because while there’s a clear indication of ‘No self nominations’ - people still post their own work.
So even if the rule of contacting your nominee was there, many would ignore it because the prevailing thought would be, “oh I know she’ll be happy I did this because we’re friends, and this is a great poem” ...
Bottomline to this thread between everything else ...
1. One win per year for a given poet (assuming MPAs aren’t abused) ...
2. No self nominations
3. *One nomination per nominator per month
4. It remains a voted comp
Yes; it did. If I failed to tell you that I was personally notifying those who had been nominated, then you didn't know to do it or put it in the guidelines.
What we think people should do is irrelevant when it's not in the guidelines. Not everyone thinks alike.
No it’s very relevant, because while there’s a clear indication of ‘No self nominations’ - people still post their own work.
So even if the rule of contacting your nominee was there, many would ignore it because the prevailing thought would be, “oh I know she’ll be happy I did this because we’re friends, and this is a great poem” ...
Bottomline to this thread between everything else ...
1. One win per year for a given poet (assuming MPAs aren’t abused) ...
2. No self nominations
3. *One nomination per nominator per month
4. It remains a voted comp
LobodeSanPedro said:
No it’s very relevant, because while there’s a clear indication of ‘No self nominations’ - people still post their own work.
So even if the rule of contacting your nominee was there, many would ignore it because the prevailing thought would be, “oh I know she’ll be happy I did this because we’re friends, and this is a great poem” ...
Bottomline to this thread between everything else ...
1. One win per year for a given poet (assuming MPAs aren’t abused) ...
2. No self nominations
3. *One nomination per nominator per month
4. It remains a voted comp
5. Nominator must notify the nominated, as the winner will be shared across our social networking platforms.
6. You agree by allowing your poem to be nominated that DU may post it on our social networking accounts ( or however webmiss has it worded in her monthly visual comp ).
It's true many obviously don't read the guidelines, thus they do self-nominate; however, there are very few ( that I have witnessed ) self-nominations. All anyone need do is report the entry as ineligible and a mod will hide it. They've been really good in cleaning up threads I've reported.
But, the bottom-line is notifications of nominations; therefore, those that do read the guidelines, or are familiar with them, would've automatically notified their nominee. The majority adhere to the guidelines of the competition. It certainly wouldn't hurt to include such a rule in the above.
Lastly, thank you for accepting this torch and keeping this competition alive.
No it’s very relevant, because while there’s a clear indication of ‘No self nominations’ - people still post their own work.
So even if the rule of contacting your nominee was there, many would ignore it because the prevailing thought would be, “oh I know she’ll be happy I did this because we’re friends, and this is a great poem” ...
Bottomline to this thread between everything else ...
1. One win per year for a given poet (assuming MPAs aren’t abused) ...
2. No self nominations
3. *One nomination per nominator per month
4. It remains a voted comp
5. Nominator must notify the nominated, as the winner will be shared across our social networking platforms.
6. You agree by allowing your poem to be nominated that DU may post it on our social networking accounts ( or however webmiss has it worded in her monthly visual comp ).
It's true many obviously don't read the guidelines, thus they do self-nominate; however, there are very few ( that I have witnessed ) self-nominations. All anyone need do is report the entry as ineligible and a mod will hide it. They've been really good in cleaning up threads I've reported.
But, the bottom-line is notifications of nominations; therefore, those that do read the guidelines, or are familiar with them, would've automatically notified their nominee. The majority adhere to the guidelines of the competition. It certainly wouldn't hurt to include such a rule in the above.
Lastly, thank you for accepting this torch and keeping this competition alive.
Ahavati said:
5. Nominator must notify the nominated, as the winner will be shared across our social networking platforms.
6. You agree by allowing your poem to be nominated that DU may post it on our social networking accounts ( or however webmiss has it worded in her monthly visual comp ).
Its been a while - but I agree with Ahavati points 5 and 6 should be on the list
5. Nominator must notify the nominated, as the winner will be shared across our social networking platforms.
6. You agree by allowing your poem to be nominated that DU may post it on our social networking accounts ( or however webmiss has it worded in her monthly visual comp ).
Its been a while - but I agree with Ahavati points 5 and 6 should be on the list
David_Macleod said:
Its been a while - but I agree with Ahavati points 5 and 6 should be on the list
I don’t disagree with either of you. The posting of said rules will certainly help streamline the competition and subsequent vote ...
... but you both know as former moderators, no matter how many guidelines or warnings are put out in any arena on this site - there are those who will post what they will for any number “reasons”.
As long as the incoming host is consistent with the aforementioned, and members are more diligent about adhering to the guidelines, all should go well.
Cheers
Its been a while - but I agree with Ahavati points 5 and 6 should be on the list
I don’t disagree with either of you. The posting of said rules will certainly help streamline the competition and subsequent vote ...
... but you both know as former moderators, no matter how many guidelines or warnings are put out in any arena on this site - there are those who will post what they will for any number “reasons”.
As long as the incoming host is consistent with the aforementioned, and members are more diligent about adhering to the guidelines, all should go well.
Cheers
Anonymous
summultima said:
Not talking about isolated incidents or trolls like you mentioned or du have seen of..Am talking of no naming shaming here too..but the whole lot of MPA (Multiple Profiling Anonymities) is as if becoming the norm here...so much mushrooming floating rotating profiles, often or sometimes coming together in simultaneity too ...of not by one or specific troll...but by largely by the larger profiles here who have been long & perhaps longest here...The MPA is so blatantaly felt & its so (ill)intentions of why they are created is so many.. hate politics, bullying, divisiveness, etc etc etc ...all killing the spirit & truth of love & art...NOT TO JUST TALK OF A COMPETITION LIKE P.O.M. this MPA IS KILLING THE WHOLE SITE ITSELF...someone who talked-fought-wrote poetry against such MPA by obvious big members of du..i remember her as Taryn...is no more here active...So do everyone who raises voice against MPA ...all for the sake of Truth & Art,,,will have to finally go away from site as it is not being addressed???? This is not just a question to you , no grudge against anyone here...but asking Admin & all in here..what could be done to prevent MPA... IP Check & / or Similar foolproof check that will allow only IP-address-wise existence of Profiles??.
Ahh, I am Sorry & am not being Pessimistic when I say..by the time we 'Keep Hope' the site is still mobbing with more & more MPA...& perhaps genuine members have no option but to stay away forever... Have all the faith in Technologhy & but the Admin the Webmiss-I have all the respects & adorations to Her..But is she directly or indirectly encouraging MPA by not addressing the issue & she herself being in Anonymous Veil saying she exist here in other anaonymous profile??
Well, as far as the votes in this thread clearly have a tilt towards the Original Format of One Win per Year..the P.O.M.issue will be taken care to that specific extent as you say..
Its good that there are so many new comps ...& yes agrees there is need for members (old or new) taking responsibility ..who could engage actively ..But am sorry to refer back to what I said earlier in this thread...comps. such as New Poet of the Month become unacceptable until such MPA are existent...
Juz me again in all the views above...its what i feel intense & hope so many here feels too...am coming out openly with these for DU's own good-not for any personal motives or so.. Light & Love to You all Poetic Souls xx
Ahavati said:
Not everyone who has MPA's are detrimental to the site. It's not the honest people who are upfront with them, Uma, it's the ones' who aren't honest about who they are, as well as their negative intentions. I say this as the owner of three additional MPA ( which I am honest about ), nor use for ill intentions. I don't know what to suggest that could address those who aren't honest, and use them for harassment or derogatory means. I don't.
If you're gunning for all MPA's to be done away with ( and I am not saying you are ), it will not change anything. Because the negative will continue, uncaught, because they aren't honest. I know several members who have left DU not because of MPA's - but for other reasons: spiteful, bitter, vindictive people.
And, for the record, Taryn herself had MPA's. . .
Yep. Taryn certainly wasn't against having them. I remember we critiqued some of the poems she posted as ExquisiteChaos in the Critique Series thread.
I'm sure she was against MPs being used for nefarious purposes, as most members are. Probably moreso, since she understood the value in having multiple accounts.
YES, It would be great if technology was available to tie "undisclosed MPs" together. Or prevent banned members from creating new accounts with a fresh smartphone.
Unfortunately, just as a poem can be falsely reported as a personal attack on another member for the purpose of punishing the writer ( which has been done to me by at least 3 different active members here ),
crusades to do away with MPs have been carried out by spiteful individuals purely to punish certain members who have MPs.
Advice to everyone here: be careful whose cause you align yourself with.
Not talking about isolated incidents or trolls like you mentioned or du have seen of..Am talking of no naming shaming here too..but the whole lot of MPA (Multiple Profiling Anonymities) is as if becoming the norm here...so much mushrooming floating rotating profiles, often or sometimes coming together in simultaneity too ...of not by one or specific troll...but by largely by the larger profiles here who have been long & perhaps longest here...The MPA is so blatantaly felt & its so (ill)intentions of why they are created is so many.. hate politics, bullying, divisiveness, etc etc etc ...all killing the spirit & truth of love & art...NOT TO JUST TALK OF A COMPETITION LIKE P.O.M. this MPA IS KILLING THE WHOLE SITE ITSELF...someone who talked-fought-wrote poetry against such MPA by obvious big members of du..i remember her as Taryn...is no more here active...So do everyone who raises voice against MPA ...all for the sake of Truth & Art,,,will have to finally go away from site as it is not being addressed???? This is not just a question to you , no grudge against anyone here...but asking Admin & all in here..what could be done to prevent MPA... IP Check & / or Similar foolproof check that will allow only IP-address-wise existence of Profiles??.
Ahh, I am Sorry & am not being Pessimistic when I say..by the time we 'Keep Hope' the site is still mobbing with more & more MPA...& perhaps genuine members have no option but to stay away forever... Have all the faith in Technologhy & but the Admin the Webmiss-I have all the respects & adorations to Her..But is she directly or indirectly encouraging MPA by not addressing the issue & she herself being in Anonymous Veil saying she exist here in other anaonymous profile??
Well, as far as the votes in this thread clearly have a tilt towards the Original Format of One Win per Year..the P.O.M.issue will be taken care to that specific extent as you say..
Its good that there are so many new comps ...& yes agrees there is need for members (old or new) taking responsibility ..who could engage actively ..But am sorry to refer back to what I said earlier in this thread...comps. such as New Poet of the Month become unacceptable until such MPA are existent...
Juz me again in all the views above...its what i feel intense & hope so many here feels too...am coming out openly with these for DU's own good-not for any personal motives or so.. Light & Love to You all Poetic Souls xx
Ahavati said:
Not everyone who has MPA's are detrimental to the site. It's not the honest people who are upfront with them, Uma, it's the ones' who aren't honest about who they are, as well as their negative intentions. I say this as the owner of three additional MPA ( which I am honest about ), nor use for ill intentions. I don't know what to suggest that could address those who aren't honest, and use them for harassment or derogatory means. I don't.
If you're gunning for all MPA's to be done away with ( and I am not saying you are ), it will not change anything. Because the negative will continue, uncaught, because they aren't honest. I know several members who have left DU not because of MPA's - but for other reasons: spiteful, bitter, vindictive people.
And, for the record, Taryn herself had MPA's. . .
Yep. Taryn certainly wasn't against having them. I remember we critiqued some of the poems she posted as ExquisiteChaos in the Critique Series thread.
I'm sure she was against MPs being used for nefarious purposes, as most members are. Probably moreso, since she understood the value in having multiple accounts.
YES, It would be great if technology was available to tie "undisclosed MPs" together. Or prevent banned members from creating new accounts with a fresh smartphone.
Unfortunately, just as a poem can be falsely reported as a personal attack on another member for the purpose of punishing the writer ( which has been done to me by at least 3 different active members here ),
crusades to do away with MPs have been carried out by spiteful individuals purely to punish certain members who have MPs.
Advice to everyone here: be careful whose cause you align yourself with.
Anonymous
Taryn isn’t here to defend herself. And frankly, it’s bad fucking sport to keep digging.
The only one you’re shaming here is you.
The only one you’re shaming here is you.
i'm confused... this no-longer-a-member person isn't being accused of anything she might wish to defend herself from, and J&A weren't the first to bring her up.
i agree that it's not productive to introduce old members into the framework of this discussion by name, but the replies i've seen are not accusatory. well, that's how i read it anyway.
almost all online poetry forums have to deal with this issue; some are more effective than others, but nowadays even banning an IP addy isn't going to guarantee a person won't use a VPN to get around this.
for anyone who doesn't know, a VPN is this:
What Is A VPN?
VPN or Virtual Private Network
A Virtual Private Network is a connection method used to add security and privacy to private and public networks, like WiFi Hotspots and the Internet. Virtual Private Networks are most often used by corporations to protect sensitive data. However, using a personal VPN is increasingly becoming more popular as more interactions that were previously face-to-face transition to the Internet. Privacy is increased with a Virtual Private Network because the user's initial IP address is replaced with one from the Virtual Private Network provider. Subscribers can obtain an IP address from any gateway city the VPN service provides. For instance, you may live in San Francisco, but with a Virtual Private Network, you can appear to live in Amsterdam, New York, or any number of gateway cities.
i agree that it's not productive to introduce old members into the framework of this discussion by name, but the replies i've seen are not accusatory. well, that's how i read it anyway.
almost all online poetry forums have to deal with this issue; some are more effective than others, but nowadays even banning an IP addy isn't going to guarantee a person won't use a VPN to get around this.
for anyone who doesn't know, a VPN is this:
What Is A VPN?
VPN or Virtual Private Network
A Virtual Private Network is a connection method used to add security and privacy to private and public networks, like WiFi Hotspots and the Internet. Virtual Private Networks are most often used by corporations to protect sensitive data. However, using a personal VPN is increasingly becoming more popular as more interactions that were previously face-to-face transition to the Internet. Privacy is increased with a Virtual Private Network because the user's initial IP address is replaced with one from the Virtual Private Network provider. Subscribers can obtain an IP address from any gateway city the VPN service provides. For instance, you may live in San Francisco, but with a Virtual Private Network, you can appear to live in Amsterdam, New York, or any number of gateway cities.
Anonymous
just mentioned her again for no reason huh.
Anonymous
butters said:i'm confused... this no-longer-a-member person isn't being accused of anything she might wish to defend herself from, and J&A weren't the first to bring her up.
i agree that it's not productive to introduce old members into the framework of this discussion by name, but the replies i've seen are not accusatory. well, that's how i read it anyway.
almost all online poetry forums have to deal with this issue; some are more effective than others, but nowadays even banning an IP addy isn't going to guarantee a person won't use a VPN to get around this.
for anyone who doesn't know, a VPN is this:
You read correctly.
Miss_Sub said:Taryn isn’t here to defend herself. And frankly, it’s bad fucking sport to keep digging.
The only one you’re shaming here is you.
Miss_Sub said:just mentioned her again for no reason huh.
https://deepundergroundpoetry.com/forum/boil/read/10834/
* rolls eyes again *
i agree that it's not productive to introduce old members into the framework of this discussion by name, but the replies i've seen are not accusatory. well, that's how i read it anyway.
almost all online poetry forums have to deal with this issue; some are more effective than others, but nowadays even banning an IP addy isn't going to guarantee a person won't use a VPN to get around this.
for anyone who doesn't know, a VPN is this:
You read correctly.
Miss_Sub said:Taryn isn’t here to defend herself. And frankly, it’s bad fucking sport to keep digging.
The only one you’re shaming here is you.
Miss_Sub said:just mentioned her again for no reason huh.
https://deepundergroundpoetry.com/forum/boil/read/10834/
* rolls eyes again *
JohnnyBlaze said:
Again, no one has been or is attacking her in this thread.
* rolls eyes *
i haven't read it as that, it's true, but unless there are quotes from this person stating her position—either way—then all we have is inference through experience, and we know that poets are NEVER gonna agree on implied intent :D
Again, no one has been or is attacking her in this thread.
* rolls eyes *
i haven't read it as that, it's true, but unless there are quotes from this person stating her position—either way—then all we have is inference through experience, and we know that poets are NEVER gonna agree on implied intent :D
