Wow...I've been trying to write this reply for literally hours. Between other priorities, interruptions, devices dying, technical difficulties, and simply trying to piece together my thoughts, it's been a challenge lol
That being said here goes another attempt. It's gonna be long winded but I don't plan to beat a dead horse so this is my final push lol
I was concerned about the CH being confused by the 2 lists with repeat entries, not creatives, as we don't see said lists.
With the current way if a CH doesn't rate any loves or shortlist manually, then likes (or the next highest rating given) serves the same purpose of the would be shortlist. What's the difference?
Remember, the CH isn't technically shortlisting those love entries the current way. They're expressing their love for the name which automatically puts it on the shortlist. That should be an independent decision they make on their own. Think about how many of you have been shortlisted after an OTRT or without a rating at all. The CH knows they can bypass a love rating if they like it enough, and as we've seen in the forums, they do! So when they rate it a love why is SH deciding for them it's shortlist worthy. If they thought so, wouldn't they have just manually shortlisted it themselves like they do so many times? It just doesn't make sense to me. Does the CH really have to go back through all the loves that were shortlisted and put them right back where they initially wanted them, in love only?
So is mine!! However, I think my way would be better for CHs and creatives. I pretty much just explained above why I think my way is better for the CH, but the current way sets many creatives up for a downgrade as soon as they're given that love, because the short list is meant to be, well, a short list, and for the CH to dwindle down that "short list" they'll need to DOWNGRADE entries back to the love category where they belonged in the first place!
Exactly, so why are loves automatically shortlisted?
They can do all of those things my way as well!!
I'm not sure how any of this makes the current way better than mine?
You're right, but only because they'll have to go back and DOWNGRADE loves that only made the shortlist by default. DOWNGRADE them back to just a love, which will feel like a love being downgraded to a like. Then, and only then, the lists won't be the same.
Again...that can be done my way as well!!
I really think my way would be better for EVERYBODY.
Many of you know I don't think the ratings should be used as a sorting tool and a guidance tool all together. My way helps eliminate that, tho not entirely. But the current way actually supports this by giving loves the same status as a manually shortlisted name. If the lists were completely independent of each other the love (and other ratings) could be almost pure feedback because the shortlist is where they put ONLY true contenders. There would be no need to DOWNGRADE default loves to SORT them out of the way.
My problem is that loves have always been looked at as true contenders because they were the highest rating available. This is where sorting would come in. CHs will love a name knowing full well they're not going to use it but want to guide the creative by saying, "hey, I love this." But now it's lumped in with ones that they know they might use (true contenders). Then they'll get to a point where they need to change the ratings to clear out the "guidance loves" so they can have a true shortlist, eventually downgrading to get an awesome name that won't work out of the way. Shouldn't they be shortlisting the true contenders and leaving the loves where they are? Which would allow them to rate based on guidance only. Why can't a CH convey how good a creative is doing with a love, without it in turn it being viewed as a true contender. A love should simply be a rating, not an implied true contender!
I know this is ridiculously long, and I'm sorry!!! But, I'm letting it go after this!! I just ask SH or anyone reading this (if you made it this far lol) to help me understand how the current way is better than mine? I mean that sincerely. I've tried to look at it from all angles but I still think my way serves a better purpose.