Shortlisted Names


Welcome back @seezall, first of all. Secondly, I have to say that I think that is a very fair idea to this whole new construct. I like it, if we have to keep this at all.


@Commulinks thanks for the clarification! That being said, I still find having 2 lists that are virtually the same utterly nonsensical. If every love gets automatically shortlisted, then wouldn’t they have to sift through the shortlist to kick the non-contenders back to a love status only? Doesn’t that create more work for them? Isn’t that a bit backwards? Shouldn’t they be looking through their loves and new entries etc for those absolute perfect names to shortlist?

My way is far better lol :wink:


I understand what you’re saying, but the way it is now, a CH can take a name off the shortlist without affecting the Love it rating. You just see a little tag under the entry that says “removed from shortlist.” So putting all the Love its on the shortlist doesn’t seem like a problem to me. If the CH never creates a shortlist themselves, the Love its serve that purpose anyway.


Yes, @Chasity2ku, they would have to unshortlist those that were automatically put there. However, this about 2 things: eliminating downgrades and choosing winners. The shortlist chooses winners, not the love list. And it was meant for when contests close. That is important and not backward. And yes, they can still look through likes and loves for shortlisting… and the reason that is good is because there’s not more downgrading to no thank you and likes can move up. This is a dynamic process, remember, and the CH may unshortlist because they found out there is a trademark issue, for example. They may still love it, but they can’t have it. The two lists will not be virtually the same at all. OTRTs can move to shortlist after the contest is closed and loves can be unshortlisted.


No matter how it’s explained or the reasons’ why of it all is just too confusing for me :confused: I will keep enjoying reading everyones take on it and hopefully watch my bank account grow​:wink::wink:


That’s some clarity Clinks-- finally get it now. Ty!


@ALDaisy1 @Commulinks

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

My way:

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!

[quote=“Commulinks, post:24, topic:2294”]
The shortlist chooses winners, not the love list. [/quote]

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.


I like your way. .It should be independent of the ch’s choice not an automatic. I just lost a contest where I was top trender even after it closed. …being short listed gave me false hope. Js I don’t get the purpose of shortlisting.


Well, quite simply, @Chasity2ku, I disagree. Also, with all the changes lately, I think everything should be left alone so the dust can settle.


Well, quite simply, @ALDaisy1, fair enough :wink:


You’ve put a lot of thought into this and I always feel that thoughtful ideas should be considered so we’ll see what @Grant and the team thinks about your idea. I do see your point, but I am not yet sure I see the pros and cons.

I will say this: I do think that shortlisting before a contest is closed could become an issue now. Here’s why: when shortlisting was initiated, all the highest ratings went to the shortlist after the contest closed. I think that is still going to happen so now what could happen is that the CH shortlists what they want to shortlist before the contest closes, then the rest of the highest entries will move to the shortlist when the contest closes (will they?) which means the CH has to go back an unshortlist the ones they didn’t put on the list before the contest closed. Based on what I see right now, I’m not sure that is a huge issue because CHs seem to be shortlisting all of their loves.

I do see one great benefit of shortlisting now, though. I got a shortlist on an unrated entry in a contest where the CH didn’t rate my entries at all. It’s nice to be able to see the CH actively going through names. And let’s say that this CH never rated anything after the contest closed (before shortlisting), a contestant could win on an unrated name and never get the points for the love. (I’ve won contests in every category…unrated, OTRT, like, love as I imagine everyone has).


Yeah I put some thought into this but it was before shortlisting was introduced. It was my winner’s circle idea. Shortlist, winner’s circle…call it what you want. The purpose of my winner’s circle idea was to eliminate downgrading for sorting purposes, clarify the primary source of guidance between CH and their creatives, AND, because I want to know what creatives are true contenders vs just supplying high quality names for a given contest. Trending has no bearing on who’s actually in the running to win, nor does getting a love. I’m always wondering (rather the love is mine or not) is it a true contender, or are they just loving it so I/we stay on that track, or are they simply undecided still?? This new way does none of those things, for me.

The new way may rectify issues for some, and that’s awesome…truly! But for me it’s a bunch of hoopla that doesn’t fix anything.

Wait…aren’t loves auto shortlisted?

They’re not shortlisting their loves…they’re loving their loves, and then the system shortlists them. Furthermore, they’re not loving their manually shortlisted names either, the system does that too.

What’s actually happening is they’re not un-shortlisting the autos. I think in most cases it’s because they don’t wanna take the time, or they might not even understand why there are two lists that are exactly the same in the first place. Remember, the shortlist and love lists are identical until the CH starts un-shortlisting.

That’s so backwards to me. As a CH wouldn’t you rather sift through all entries looking for the gems to put on a special list for consideration, or would you rather rate some loves (that you could have easily shortlisted from the get go) just to turn around and have to yet again sort the same entries back to a love. It’s all a bunch of hoopla to me.

Plus, when you go back through them it becomes process of elimination rather than looking for the ones that speak to you. Again, backwards.

Ask yourself what cons do you see in my way that you don’t see in the current way. Then ask yourself what cons you see in in the current way that aren’t in mine. Then I’d love for you to share your thoughts.

I’ve done this a lot, as you can see in my recent posts.

So if you wanna take the time, I’d love to hear your take on the pros and cons of both.


This may be just me, but I have the overall opinion that CHs seem to be predominately picky with ratings as is. In most cases, from my experience at least, I don’t think many CHs give ‘Love it’ ratings to entries if they just love them but don’t intend to consider them as a potential. I’ve seen far too much evidence to deter this thinking as a majority case basis. There may be some that are generous and do so, but I doubt those that are barely make up 5% of all CHs. I only say this because how infrequently LOVES seem to be given and even how hard ‘likes’ are to get in MOST contests.

Anyhow, with this being said, I also don’t see a point of short lists unless the CH is in control of the shortlist versus the ratings being in control of it until the contest closes. It’s confusing to me as well. Don’t get me wrong, I think it is a great idea if there were a better application and implementation of it such as Allowing CHs access to the shortlist from the beginning of the contest, maybe perhaps making the shortlist a rating itself (keep current rating struture but make SHORTLIST a rating above LOVE and explain that SHORTLIST means that the CH has decided THOSE entries are FINAL contenders – this way a CH can love, like, otrt, and nty entries as much as they want and use the short list as a SHORTLIST meaning it’s only implementation is to categorize and sort the names from all the other categories for process of determining final selection list of which they will choose from – this way they can be encouraged to rate entries as they please and then throughout the contest to begin deciding from rating categories which entries they see as possibles and then placing them into the short list. From there if a name is shortlisted it will receive the highest rating available and can be moved onto and off of list at CHs discretion. So it would work like what it seems that @Chasity2ku is talking about and would make so much more sense.


Furthermore, adding to my idea, if it’s made a mandatory thing 1) that an entry must be rated first to then be shortlisted and then the rating changed (to a love it, obviously) automatically via SH automation process and 2) that a winner can only be chosen from the shortlist feature this would help CHs begin to utilize and understand this feature and implement it into their process as a way of using it for what it is meant to be used for and helping them to not only better sort their choices but to be better at rating as well.

Just ideas and suggestions to try to make this make sense and work and benefit all.


Our goal for adding the shortlist feature is to separate the rating process from the final selection process, and to ensure that the entry ratings are not changed once the contest has closed. Based upon our analysis, the majority of the CHs give a Love It rating, when they are seriously considering it as a viable option. Therefore, in order to save them effort in rebuilding the shortlist, we automatically transfer the Love It rated entries to their initial shortlist.

Doing this while the contest is active also introduces the concept of Shortlist to CH early enough in the process, so that they can continue using this feature after a contest has closed. As the CH continues with the validation process, they have the ability to remove Love It rated entries from shortlist and bring other ideas back to the shortlist.

We believe this is an efficient solution that minimizes any redundant effort by the CH, but also gives them flexibility to manage the list independent of the ratings that were provided while the contest was active. We will continue to monitor this, and make further adjustments if needed to ensure that this feature is used most effectively.


Lol I’m starting to feel like I’m in the twilight zone lol

First of all, the few ppl that have chimed in keep saying, “but we can do xxxx with the new way” as if to say you can’t with mine. However, everything that can be done with the current system can be done with my system, and I’ve pointed that out at every opportunity.

Second, unless I’m extremely misunderstanding here @rareworthy’s suggestion is the EXACT process I’ve put TOO much time in trying to explain.

@grant even things you just said applies to my way as well. Plus, you stated this new way was to eliminate redundancy. It seems like a contradiction when you have them recreate their love list, essentially. That’s redundant. Rating a love, then later deciding it’s worthy of shortlisting is not.

@grant what are SHs views on my idea? What are the cons? The only cons I can personally come up with exist in the current way as well.

Trying to understand the new way has been confusing for a lot of us, and trying to understand a random persons way is not priority…I get that. That being said, I feel like my concept is not fully understood. I think this because I’ve had to continuously say…you can do that with mine too, and then I feel like my exact idea was put back out there as if it’d never been thrown out in the first place.

Anyway I’m not trying to harp…I just can’t help but reply with my honest thoughts…long winded or not


Only when the contest is closed. I am seeing shortlisting while the contest is open and the CH is doing that. I see one contest where they have shortlisted one love but not another.


@Chasity2ku My writing wasn’t an idea, it was more or less my saying why I don’t agree (with current format) as well and the context of the way in which I would agree and meant that it seemed that’s like what you were proposing too and why I agreed it would work. Furthermore, from @grant’s reply, it seems the only reason the way it is now is the way it is without expanding upon it like what you’ve said is because the way it is now is automated (aka minimizing redundant effort) but allows them to edit it post contest. See, that’s what to me is making it redundant. Giving full control at the beginning and teaching them to use it for their own benefit and for benefit of all involved would eliminate the redundancy, provide ways for them to engage and remain active, give them more power over their choice, teach how to better rate (for the benefit of ALL), teach how to engage, and also answer some previous worries about the new features of abandoned contest payment structures (because better sorting and better rating would mean top submissions and top creatives to only be in the list of choices and would mean that it would be a small number of people, and addressing engagement, and addressing truly knowing if your entry is a top contender, and so forth.

Again, my only take away from this and only my opinion and only an effort to agree and suggest ideas and provide feedback and suggests that could be more beneficial. So yes, I really truly do agree and see this versus what grant described as being the more pronounced, better understandable, more beneficial, more indepth version of the current model.

I’ll digress now.

Edit: One last thing I’d like to address – I remember there being a way that NTYs could be listed by CHs to not be seen again in their list if they choose so, so how does this work with that? Because if this should be a way of ‘shortlisting’, making better decisions, and truly finding a good fit for themselves, if they choose not to be able to see a certain entire category of submissions or whatnot, how does this not impact their ability to truly decide a perfect fit for themselves?
because they may just go click click click down the list one day without reading comments, ideas, reasonings, or may just be in a mood of thinking the right choice will just jump out at them – and thereby limit their considerations when it comes time to consider sorting and shortlisting.


Hi everyone -

Thanks for putting in the time and effort to explain all of your thoughts about the new Shortlisting feature.

As a beta program, the shortlist will certainly go through changes and iterations. However, at this point, we will likely wait to make updates based on CH feedback and user data.

I do want to take a moment to explain an important aspect of the shortlist UX to anyone who is interested:

  • While the contest is open, the CH focuses on ratings.

  • When the contest closes, the CH focuses on building their Shortlist by reviewing the entries to their contest.

We have build the functionality so that the Shortlist should be an afterthought while the contest is open, and it will become a focus once the crowdstorming has closed and the CH moves on to deliberation - as in the end the Shortlist is a deliberation tool.


Short story: I like shortlisting.