discussion threads before or after voting?

I agree with TheMacB
Unintentionally, people pays more attention on films with hot threads, maybe missing other good films with less discussion. I guess there is also a sense of familiarity that can, subconciously, raise your votes towards a filmmaker you admire.

In this case, I vote for threads after the votation
Pablo
 
I have seen the threads as in interesting idea.

For me, i saw all the shortfilms and i look into threads only after watching the film to look what people thinks about it. But that doesnt change my mind at all.

In our case, i think our controversy similo thread has had more disadvantages than benefits.
 
I hate to say this but I think some of you are putting the cart before the horse. We're not paying attention because there are hot threads, perhaps there are hot threads because those were the films worth watching and commenting on.

I have to be honest, it was pure drudge work getting through many of the entries. Not that I could do much better, maybe next time around I'll submit one and you can post the same thing about me. I'm not trying to come off as superior, I'm just saying that the films that are receiving attention are receiving it for a reason. By eliminating the threads prior to voting, I think the end results would be the same.

Matt
 
MattC said:
I hate to say this but I think some of you are putting the cart before the horse. We're not paying attention because there are hot threads, perhaps there are hot threads because those were the films worth watching and commenting on.

I have to be honest, it was pure drudge work getting through many of the entries. Not that I could do much better, maybe next time around I'll submit one and you can post the same thing about me. I'm not trying to come off as superior, I'm just saying that the films that are receiving attention are receiving it for a reason. By eliminating the threads prior to voting, I think the end results would be the same.

Matt
Click to expand...

I hear you matt, they are receiving their due attention -- but at the same time in many cases that requires defense for your film. I think what MacB is saying is that letting the films speak for themselves might be a more interesting route.

And conversely, I think the posting results would be the same if we had waited until after. I just don't like to think that the popular DVX posters, (no offense guys -- in fact, this is a compliment) like John_Hudson and briceman and Shaun_Murphy have an affect on other people's voting.

Maybe we could have a watching and voting period,
And Then a commenting period,
Then afterwards, a Results period?

s'a lot of periods. But I think it would be a much more sound way of dealing with things, and still getting comments to all of the filmmakers.
 
How about the films go up ANONYMOUSLY until after voting... so we don't even know who made what.

Some might be obvious, but for the most part you'd be focused on the movie-only... not who made it.

Thoughts?


I like the idea of comments after... but I can also see the point that the winners would be commented on most. Personally, I'd go for "after the voting" if it were a requirement that as part of the contest you have a month to comment on every film... and only then do the results go up. If you didn't comment (or at least show you made your best attempt to put up something constructive for every film), you're DQ'd.

Though I have NO idea how you'd enforce that :shocked:
 
EditPhish says :
"How about the films go up ANONYMOUSLY until after voting... so we don't even know who made what.

Some might be obvious, but for the most part you'd be focused on the movie-only... not who made it.

Thoughts?"

I think that's an excellent idea, although my votes weren't made on who made them, but my own humble opinion.

It depends on whether the 'makers' can keep quiet if coaxed. ;)
 
While I'd love to see this become a more pure and uncorrupted contest, I'm not yet convinced the current way isn't the best way. It's simple, it encourages discussion of even the films that didn't do as well in the voting, and it keeps us occupied during the gruelling watching-and-voting period. ;)
 
I think AFTER the contest results. But that's some self control you're asking from a lot of eager people. lol.

I think one way to stem this could be to release a poster of the film, and maybe even the script. This way it forces people to look at behind the scenes, and then they get to see final film and vote. A sort of education of production perhaps, to kill some 'balloting' time.

Just a thought.

EJ
 
i like abraham's suggestion. we watch the films without commenting until voting. then after the ballots are in we have a week of comments before the results are released.
 
theMacB, that would theoretically almost force people to watch the film again after voting was over to make comments. A lot of people do that already, but it'd waste time to seperate voting and commenting, since they are two sides of the same coin.

In truth, the comments are more important than the voting, so I'd rather see voting time sacrificed than commenting time.

I'd propose that the comments be submitted blindly (meaning, people can comment on the films, but only the filmmakers can read them before the end of voting). Basically they fill out their comments, hit 'submit' and they disappear for a while. The filmmaker can respond privately until after voting is over.

Thus the filmmakers get immediate feedback, but the voting is not tainted by the comment storm associated with some of the more immediately impactful films.
 
I agree, it seems like a fair way to do things. With that said, I have always enjoyed the ongoing comments (this time and during the ZombieFest) during the voting period. Yes, you have to deal with a lot of hype surrounding one film but, at least during the last two contests, it didn't necessarily adversly effect the results.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top