Maybe Change the No, Thank You option

I am thinking that if you changed the ‘No, Thank You’ option in the CH rating parameters to something like ‘No Way, Absolutely Not’, then we would receive more ‘On the right Track’ selections. Logically, a rating of ‘On the Right Track’ means that the name presented is within the guidelines of the brief whereas a rating of ‘No Way, Not Even Close’ is indirectly saying, did you even read the brief?

The current rating of ‘No, Thank You’ is so general it could apply to all the entries except for the one that wins, and this has happened. This rating is so general that it ends up being the default rating for about 80% of everyone’s submissions if a rating is given. Maybe the text needs to be less polite than ‘no, thank you’, the frownie face doesn’t see to be enough.

1 Like

Interesting point @Arnet and I understand it, but I do feel the “No, Thank you” signifies professionalism, and you need that for a site like this. SH had a different system in play before the switch over to the ‘faces’. It was stars. Earlier on, If you receive 1 star, you lost points! Then SH ditched that so you wouldn’t loose points. After that, came the switch over to the faces. It was first "Nah’ with a bright red face! Horrible! What they have in place now, seems perfect to me.


a lot of my no thank yous have actually been on the right track if you go by what wins - its getting to be a bit of a lottery


I think this is a great point! I find it a bit silly to complain about what the actual rating is named as long as it’s not rude. I’ve seen all the changes since the stars. The new system is hands down better than the stars, imo, but regardless of what the lowest rating is called, it has honestly stung the same no matter what. I’ve never understood anyone’s complaint for this to be softened.

I wonder…has it really made any difference to some of you that you are told “no, thank you” vs “nah” etc??

It does however make a difference to me if the CH thinks I’m on track or not! The “no, thank” rating has become a polite way of saying, good job but not gonna work. That’s the exact purpose of “on the right track”, right? It’s vital to have a rating letting us know we are way off base!

If the lowest rating somehow stated the brief wasn’t followed I think the CH would be much more understanding of its intended purpose and would use it accordingly. I believe that would make it easier for the CH to sort out the less desirables from the don’t ever want to see it again entries. Plus the less desirables are just simply that, it doesn’t mean they weren’t “on the right track” in the true sense of the meaning. Overall I think it would offer better guidance to the creatives and an easier process for the CH.


“I wonder…has it really made any difference to some of you that you are told “no, thank you” vs “nah” etc??”

Actually, I don’t sniffle as much with ‘No, Thank you’ :slight_smile:


I’m sure you’re not alone Laura :slight_smile: there were clearly enough people concerned for it to be changed in the first place.

I’m curious though…would you be opposed to something that points in the direction of the brief not being followed, and if so, any suggestions of wording you’d be happy with? I can’t think of anything that’s short without out being a bit direct :confused:


How bout simply “off track” ??

I liked the old negative points, really put a damper on submission totals, now there is no real penalty when you fire away!

1 Like

Here’s a thought. Hopefully to help improve communications, how about developing a simple and quick way for the CHs to explain the "No, thank you"s?

Simply saying no isn’t very helpful.

Give CHs a list of common reasons to choose:

  1. Trademarked name in the same industry.
  2. Rejected by Management, CEO, etc.
  3. Not in line with the brief.
  4. The brief has changed.
  5. Liked it before, found better names now. (default choice)
  6. [__________] (CH’s own words, appended to the list for easy reuse)
1 Like

How about “Thank you, but EW”.

Polite but to the point. :blush:

In all seriousness, I actually like the pretty magenta color when the faces first came out. I want the “No, thank you” but with the magenta face (but not too angry looking). Anyway… just my 2cents.

1 Like

Ooh…# 3 is good…“not in line with the brief” could be a replacement for “no, thank you”

@front I’d love a quick survey like that to be in place but the CHs barely rate as it is :confused:

@seezall I agree. Having a penalty is good for the process. Maybe we need a ‘better’ penalty system, improved over the old system. How about a penalty that is calculated on all submitted entries for that contest? This should be done only after the contest has been concluded and winner found, using some clever statistical formula.

Then at least contestants won’t just be firing away and start putting in more thought and effort.


@Chasity2ku Adding to that, SH should gather feedback from CHs through an easy-click-rating survey after each contest. Let CHs rate each feature. If not done already.


@Front, I put a lot of time and work into names that end up getting rejected, it would be crushing to be further penalized.


I would think that penalizing creatives would lead to fewer submissions for Contest Holders to choose from…potentially scaring away a great idea or possible winner. I have a lot of strange ideas for names. Some Contest Holders love them, some hate them. I don’t think I should be penalized for trying to be different.



I actually like the ‘off track’ idea, since, just now, two of my names I worked hard on were rejected. So a creative is left wondering ‘why’? I suppose knowing why would keep some of us from jumping off of a cliff, or something :wink:


you arent different we all have strange ideas :wink:

1 Like

What I have found in many cases is especially near the end of the contest(but on occasion even from the beginning) the CH uses the no thank you as a filtering system to take names off the page to winnow down to the names or names he/she is considering to win. So it is not always an indicator of the quality of your name.

This is demonstrated by the fact I cannot tell you how many times I have been trending and had like it or love it (whatever their highest score is in the contest) suddenly turned into a no thank you either right before the contest ends, or after it’s closed.

Now the quality of my name didn’t suddenly go down…but in the process of getting to the name they ultimately want…many CH’s will start rejecting them to get to the one winner.

So this is when the no thank yous aren’t true gauges of your name, as it doesn’t mean you gave an inferior or inappropriate name…just one that wasn’t the ultimate winner.

Those are the ones that crush me the most,as I really have hope to win one,then have the rug pulled out.

So I certainly wouldn’t want to be penalized when my love it suddenly was changed to a rejection! That would not be fair.

So I think that is the downfall of this system that takes the “no thanks” names off the page.CH’s use it as a narrowing down tool, instead of having the scoring reflect the quality of the name you’ve submitted.

Not that that is always the case…as some names out the gate aren’t good fits…but I think that reason is more why in many contests 90% or more of all submissions are rejected.


It really sounds like a great idea, Front. I would love all that feedback. But with many entries in a contest, I don’t know how many CH’s would care to be that analytical.


@auntshommy I have a feeling many ‘well-meaning’ CHs will appreciate something that makes sense – moves the process forward, that helps them have a more apropos voice – over something merely easy or simple or seem nice. I think for the CH the thought of commenting on each and every entry is dauntingly overwhelming, scary even, so we use a little tech to give them a hand. If they do not want to explain their "No, thank you"s then they don’t have to. If they want to give a reason it’s there for their convenience. It’s optional.

@LauraE I too do not want to be penalized. Just that I believe a contest isn’t a contest without penalties. Sometimes I’m confused if this is a Contest or a Service. Is this Work or is this Play. It’s certainly a bit of both, I just don’t want to see it become all work and no play :wink: Anyway, I’m not thinking of going back to the old way of punishing each entries, what I have in mind is say if a contestant entered 50 names and all of them are "No, thank you"s then maybe get a slap on the wrist like -50 points? :grimacing: But if you were able to get just 1 OnTRT out of the 50 then no penalty at all.

1 Like

@VelocityGirl Yes I agree that strange don’t mean it’s bad.

1 Like