Contest Submission Limits


In an effort to ensure that contest holders do no get overwhelmed with too many submissions, we have made some adjustments to the “Unlimited Name Submissions” feature.

Previously, creatives could submit unlimited number of submissions in a contest if their percentile score was above 90% or if they received 2 or more high ratings in the contest.

  • Going forward, creatives with 90%+ percentile will be limited to a max of 40 submissions.

  • For every high rating you receive in a contest, you will be able to submit 5 additional entries in that contest. For example, if you are allowed to submit 20 entries (based on your percentile score) and you receive 2 high ratings in a contest, you will be allowed to submit 30 entries in that contest.

We have also made some minor adjustments to other entry limits. You can read this article for additional details:


Thank. It has long been necessary to do this. But this is a very mild solution to the problem. Creatives make mistakes even with a large percentile. I think you need to make everyone equal in submitting entries, regardless of percentile. And to allow submitting more entries only when creative receive likes in the contest.


I just want to share some big concerns I have with this and potential solutions. While I understand it can be overwelming for some CHs to have tons and tons of submissions to go through, what about those contest holders that want as many options on the table as they can get? More times than not, contest holders are thrilled to have strong participation from Creatives who are persistent in trying to hone in through trial and error to come up with just the right name for them. And they often mention how honored and excited they feel by the enthusiasm we show in our commitment to help them.

I know there is no fair or perfect system. There are too many complexities to make it 100% fair. However, I see some huge issues with this.

First of all, most CH’s don’t seem to be aware that we have limits to what we can submit. And, it is frustrating when they tell us that we are on the right track and to please submit more, and we can’t do that. While, the quick solution used to be that we could just eliminate disliked names in order to honor their request. Now, we are limited anyway even if we do eliminate disliked or unrated names and may not be able to honor their request.

Often times, Squadhelp will even ask us to submit more names when you are curating a contest and like a name on the CH’s behalf, even though we have reached our limit. And, many of us won’t be able to continue to participate. It is awkward to have to explain to them that even though they want more participation from us, that we have reached our limits.

I really think in this case, when a CH sends an automatic message requesting more submissions, regardless of how they rated that name, that that should automatically trigger our submission amount to be increased… be it an additional 5 or 10 submissions every time they ask for more.

I also think it should be up to the Contest Holder. Maybe when they are filling out their brief, they are given the option to accept unlimited submissions from creatives or tier A creatives?

I also think, since they can block certain Creatives from their contest and make their contest exclusive to only a smaller group of creatives, they should also be able to request unlimited submissions per creative.

And I think that either the top trending creative or the top 3 trending creatives should be awarded the ability to submit unlimited suggestions to that particular contest.

Another concern is that many times, CHs change course throughout their contest and can even completely change the brief to wanting a completely different type of name from what they originally asked for. And when they do this, sometimes they downgrade previously loved/liked names to dislike in order to hone in on the new direction. And this will inhibit us from participating on the new honed direction, even though we met their needs on the front end. In this case, I think a downgrade in ranking shouldn’t affect our ability to contribute. In fact,since our ability to contribute is much stricter now, maybe contest holders should not be able to dislike previously liked/loved/shortlisted names, but instead be given the option to rate those name as (No longer interested.) That way, we are not affected when they are narrowing down to their favorite 6, 3, or 1… or from being affected when they change course.

I would be interested to hear what others are thinking? In my case, I don’t have the greatest % ranking. Yet, I am consistently on the leaderboard for highest rated names, and I am in the 98th% for the most won contests. I believe that only a fraction of my success on Squadhelp is due to creativity. The bigger factor is persistence, stick-to-itiveness, and dedication to helping the CH come up with their ideal name. If us Creatives have our hands tied, we may be one suggestion away from coming up with that incredible name the CH was hoping for. And that is what is we live for here on Squadhelp.


I think the new guidelines sound fair.They are very similar to the system that used to be in place. I strongly believe CHs value quality over quantity, and this system reflects that, while still offering a clear way to earn additional entries through high ratings. I respect the persistence of other Creatives, but I also know that there are many Creatives who cannot commit hours and hours of work here each day. This system will make it more likely that everyone’s entries will be seen, and to me that seems like an improvement. If CHs give feedback that they are not receiving the volume of entries they would like, then the guidelines could be reviewed, but with the sheer number of active Creatives now, I do not see that happening.


I believe this is a good step forward. Thank you for listening SH, @grant. I also agree 100% with @ALDaisy1 point of view


Yay! I know some creatives who tend to flood contests with literally hundreds of entries will probably disagree…but I think this is totally fair. I think it encourages more thought out entries instead of spraying and praying. I also think it will help some of the abandoment issues,hopefully.My feeling is if you can’t get some likes or loves in 40 entries,then your style of naming is probably not what they are looking for,so move on. I usually can tell that in under 10 entries tops,(usually more like 4-5 entries) if I’m getting their vision and any traction or not. I think that overwhelming the CH with tons of entries from one creative not only can hurt the contest for others only putting in a few,( or even get theirs seen)…but it also can skew people’s percentages.Thanks,Grant


I understand what you are saying,… especially the idea that quality is more important than quantity. The thing about quality names, though is that they are very subjective and can only be defined by the individual contest holder/s themselves. Sometimes it takes dedication, communication, and brainstorming, which is encouraged by most of our contest holders and should also be encouraged by Squadhelp unless the contest holder wants limitations set. Have you not ever submitted a name that was originally loved and shortlisted at first, then had the rating downgraded to a dislike later on in the contest, only to resubmit that same name to another contest and win with that name or sell it in the premium market? Or vice-versa… a name that was originally disliked and then upgraded? In those cases, were those submissions not quality entries?

I also understand the concern about spraying and praying without giving a whole lot of thought to the quality of the entries. But spraying and praying also happens when a creative wants to throw in 2 to 3 names per contest, never to look back… and hit every contest possible in the hopes that one might stick and win, without really trying to refine and narrow down what a contest holder is looking for throughout the process which is often ever-changing. Hitting more contests as opposed to entering more names per contest does not necessarily ensure that we are entering quality submissions.

And if submitting large amounts of entries are so frowned upon and equates to a lack of thought and quality, then why would additional submissions be doled out as a reward? It seems counterintuitive and sends a double-message. On one hand it is a reward… on the other hand, it is frowned upon as larger amounts of entries = less quality and keeping other submissions from being read. Those in the top 90% are supposedly nailing quality without having to make multiple submissions (and overwhelming the CHs) after all.

If the main reason for these new restrictions is to keep the CHs from becoming overwhelmed, shouldn’t the contest holder have the ability to adjust or regulate the number of entries from a specific creative or group of creatives if they so choose… whether that means they choose to pause entries coming in from an individual, block them, or request additional entries? Aren’t we here to work for the contest holders and not limit their choices and discourage engagement? Please understand there are multiple ways to look at this issue.


There are a lot of assumptions there regarding Creatives who enter many contests, or only submit a few entries. How can anyone know whether or not a Creative is going back to contests and checking for updates? Maybe they are withdrawing and resubmitting. Maybe a Creative enters many contests, then focuses on a few depending on the CH’s reception of those first entries. Both seem like valid strategies to me, and neither require limitless entries.


You are absolutely right. And many creatives probably are putting a lot of thought and focus regardless of their approach or engagement in each individual contest. I should have said the same perception could be made about those who only enter a few names but enter every contest. That perception (of spray and pray) may or may not be true in either case. This is the same assumption being made about those who have made a lot of entries in some contests. It’s unfair to jump to conclusions about any creative solely based on the amount of submissions in any one given contest l… or all contests. We can’t see each other’s entries. We can’t see the requests or communication between the CH and the other Creatives. We can’t see certain ratings of others. We can’t know the time and energy that is spent or their approach. We can’t see their names that have not been rated but commented on, how many times a person takes down names and re-submits, or rating changes. We can only see the list of creatives, how many current submissions they have made, who is top trending, how many high ratings and how many entries are short listed. We can’t assume that names being submitted into contests aren’t valid, quality entries and with a lot of effort, research, and thoughtfulness regardless of the amount. Some may only enter 1 or 2 quality names in several contests because that’s all they can come up with, yet be extremely inspired with tons of ideas for another contest. I’m sure there are some that do merely dabble and half-heartedly try… and many more that take SH seriously regardless of the quantity of submissions. Either way, as Creatives, I would hope we could encourage each other, focus on ourselves and our own approach, and congratulate each other.

That being said, I do feel badly for those Creatives who can only submit 2 names based on their percentile falling below 60%. 2 entries per contest drastically deters and limits them from being true contenders. And they are discouraged from being able to contribute on a serious level if they so choose, (And thankfully I’m not in that boat, but just realize that could happen to any of us at any time)… some of these creatives could be in every other way successful on SH. They could have potentially worked very hard and have contributed a lot and won many contests, being well beyond a permanent tier A status. They could have some of the highest rated names within SH (and even be on the leaderboard,) but based on an algorithm that we have very little knowledge of or understanding and admittedly by SH may need revising, their percentage can fall. And when that happens, how will their names be read or as likely to be considered amongst those creatives that can start with 40 submissions? Based on the concerns here, their names still may be at risk to not be read. So, this new matrix doesn’t necessarily fix the issue that keeps being brought up about the concern that those who submit a few entries should be reassured not to get lost in the shuffle. Whether another creative submitted 100 + names or there are 200 entrants that submit 10 names equaling 2000 entries, there is always a chance that any of our names could get missed. But worse than getting lost in the shuffle, their ideas are stifled and limited.

Yet, the biggest point I keep coming back to is if the new restrictions are put in place solely to prevent overwhelming the Contest Holders, then the CHs should be the ones to make the call and set the parameters. They should be able to request more ideas (from an individual who they feel is adding value to their contest, a select group of creatives - such as tier A creatives, or all creatives,) and they should also be able to put a stop or hold on further submissions. If this ability were put in place, then it would balance all concerns. Initial parameters set in place to set initial limitations with a reward system, but CHs can adjust to meet their needs. This would serve both those CHs that don’t want to be flooded with names and those that appreciate and look forward to having more options to choose from.


I respect your opinion, @Betslogan, I just see more problems than benefits with your proposal. Creatives already have a hard time accepting being blocked. Think how it would feel to see only a small group being allowed to participate in a contest. And good luck keeping people from pandering through private messages to try to get themselves into a narrowed pool of Creatives. You’ve mentioned communication several times. Exactly how much communication between an individual Creative and CH is appropriate anyway? Discussing entries becomes quite an extensive conversation if entries are limitless.
In any case, I’m sure Squadhelp will review the results of these changes after a trial period, and then possibly tweak the guidelines. Time will tell.


I totally agree with your point about it being a bitter pill to swallow when Creatives are blocked from a contest. But, if that is something we have to live with, and it is the world we live in where CHs have the ability to block us, then they should also be able to request additional ideas.

And an example of communication that I’m referring to is a CH may make a comment under your name saying something along the lines of: ‘I really like the word, ‘Osmosis.’ Can you please submit more names with this word? I think this is completely appropriate and can be asked of any of us?.


Creatives with Percentile Ranking Score of 60% or below: 2 active entries (4 total including withdrawn entries) :persevere::unamused::hushed::pensive::sweat::sweat::sweat::pensive:

2 entries thats so low, with the amount of time which they invested here for many years, now they have to deal with this.Sad
i think i saw somebody somewhere with tier a and won a lot of contest with this percentile, but i forgot when and who.


Grant, it seems to me that the team has done wrong now. We already wrote that the percentile is a very unpleasant and subjective thing, which can not be judged on creativity. I get few likes, but nonetheless sometimes win contests. The introduced gradation of presentation of entries is a little unfair. Sometimes professionals make mistakes. I personally know a few creative old-timers who have huge percentiles, but they won fewer contests than me. As I already wrote, you need to limit ALL creatives to 5 offers in the contest (up to 10 including withdrawn ones). And expand the limit only when the CH puts a like


Limit all creatives to 5 entries just? that doesnt look fair at all. Oh my God, those creatives get their percentile with hardwork, determination, and experiences. Creative’s percentile not build in just 5 days, but months or even years. Therefore its good when SH give like reward or appreciation for that.

Creatives not all sudden get huge percentile, it doesnt work like magic, its accumulation of their dedication and also part of that is the quality and rating of the past submissions which effect their percentile now. Sometimes people win more sometimes people win less, and its normal.
My advice as a friend is just focus on yourself and try to keep encouraging each other because it will benefit even yourself in the long run. Don’t put other people down just to make yourself feel better or higher.


I have been waiting for a well-deserved Tier A level for a very long time, having gained 20 victories in order to get access to contests with a big prize. But now I am again limited to the ephemeral percentile, whose algorithm is not disclosed to us. Both beginners and old-timers, who have a percentile of less than 60%, suffer. It was necessary to leave 5 entries for everyone to submit. By the way, I offer an honest solution: for all creatives - more than 5 entries will be provided to those who got like or love in a particular contest. This is a very transparent and honest scheme.


Without wishing to appear rude, the current method means we are judged by the contests holders, not just one contest holder but 100s of them, those that consistently give the contest holders what they want will get better ratings than those that don’t and therefore will get a higher percentage score.

I understand that some people feel aggrieved that their score can drop if they are blocked by a contest… but again there are 100s of contest holders, those creatives that are consistently blocked should have a lesser score than those that don’t get consistently blocked. I also understand that some contest holders will block anyone / everyone for the tiniest thing, but that also means anyone / everyone can get ‘hit’ which actually makes it fair (or it’s equally unfair to all creatives, whichever way you want to look it at, it’s still fair).

To me, this is the most transparent and honest method. We can’t accuse SH of manipulating the ratings in favor of any creative if 100s of CHs are doing the rating and those with a higher rating should get more benefits. If we all get the same, no matter how good or bad we are, there is no incentive to do better.


i couldnt say it better, thanks @AbleBrands

By the way congratulation for your achievement as the 1st on seller leaderboard, wish you more success!


I understand your point. But I have a sense of justice, too. I don’t pursue personal goals. I have a percentile over 60%. If you look at my profile, I submit an average of 4 entries per contest. Then why am I writing this here? It’s very simple. I advocate transparency in the competitions and receiving a percentile. To get into the Squadhelp, you have to work long and hard. There are no bad creatives here in principle! Whoever can’t win doesn’t work here. Then why one can let 40 entries and other only 2? I don’t mind the percentile range for filing entries but it’s possible to extend it in 10% increments, i.e. 50%-60%-70%-80% and above.


I think this grading system totally benefits those who joined first. My names are quite popular but I never realised some people were able to send their entire portfolio of many names to every competition. That isn’t ‘competition’ per definition if others disappear with their 2 entries.

Now I realise I have wasted a lot of time here.


You are wrong, I am here for years and my entry limit was 5 until recently. I did not care much if my rating was 60 or 80 and it dropped, but after new rules were implemented I started posting my entries much more carefully and am improving rating slowly.