Share Poetry Critiques Poetry       Forums       Freewrite       Store      

Forums / Suggestions, Errors, Policies /
Comment ratio system


  • Paragon Belial
    Sep 10 5:56 AM 2005
    Reply
    Well the points system for promoting poems seems to be taking some flak. But would anybody else think that a “comments given to comments received” ratio system be better for the promoting of poems. The higher the ratio the more publicity you get on the site…

    What think ye of the idea?


  • Nosferatu
    September 10, 2005
    Reply

    My initial thoughts

    I like it. Honestly, I have never been enamoured by the whole point collection system. I have collected them in the past in order to try and offer a contest. ( as far as I know the only one on AP that has ever attempted to have a spoken word contest and though unsuccessful,still a good idea I think. But that’s for another post I guess)

    The problem I see with this suggestion is availability of time. Some would have more time to devote to doing critiques and so would have more exposure, regardless of the quality of the coments. Due to my career, truck driver, I am often away for extended periods of time. As such, I could not compete(for lack of a better term) with those who have more access to the sight.

    Then there is the perplexing problem of those few poets, who, because of thier ability or style, recieve few critiques. If they were to offer even a modest amount of critiques thier given/recieving ratio would be high and so would always recieve more publicity.

    On the positve side, it does promote the goal of this particular sight to generate critiques for poets willing and wanting to grow in the craft. If some kind of quality meter were also included, one designed to weed out the “nice piece, good job,” comments….

    I have been to other sights that have attempted to do similar things to this site. Some of the more succesful ones involve a que system. Before your piece is put to the group for critique, you must produce a certain amount of critiques following thier guidlines.
    Another kept the membership low in order to ensure the ability to moniter the critiques, and the moderators would offer critiques on the critiques in order to raise the quality.

    While I am unsure of exactly what should be done in this particular situation, I am fearful that the goal of Sharepoetry will be undermined by the shear volume of members and entries.

    I for one am partial to the low membership approach but realise that that may not be feasable. How would one choose the members. By quality of thier critiqueing would be my suggestion ( as opposed to the quality of thier work, it is after all for developing poets) I also realise that it may mean that I would not have been accepted as a member but I would be OK with working towards membership by improving.

    However it works out I will continue to offer comments and critiques, and posting my work. (as soon as I figure out how I still can’t archive and then post more)

    Thanks for the suggestion I will be interested in seeing what others have to say about your idea.

    Leonard


  • Terry-too
    September 10, 2005
    Reply

    Meaty messages

    I like comments that are full of solid content. I have learned such a lot, and had really great suggestions given, often quite briefly. It is not the long comment that is necessarily the best, just the one that scratches where the poem itches.
    .
    If a poem is lean on content, suggestions might extend it—or get a rebuff. If the form can be improved, and it is an area of comfort for you, to help can really provide a leg up—but only if it is welcome. I have taken my lumps when not.

    While I agree completely with the counting of comments—and perhaps the replies given as well, there needs to be a way of finding their value. Who has the time for that?
    Terry

  • :