Updates to Point System (Round 2)

We have read everyone’s feedback on this forum regarding our previous updates to the point system. We have also analyzed the impact, as well as feedback from contest holders. Based on all of the above, we are happy to announce following changes, which should encourage creative participation, as well as limit the participation from those who show a consistent pattern of low ratings from contest holder.

First, here are the changes we are making to the point system:

  1. Contest Participation: Contestants will continue to earn 40 points for participating in contests, as before.
  2. High Rated Entries: Contestants will continue to earn 50 and 40 points for 5 star and 4 star ratings respectively
  3. 3 star Rating: Contestants will now earn 3 points for all entries that are rated 3 stars by CH
  4. Low Rated Entries: We have reduced the impact of 2 star ratings. Contestants will lose 5 points (instead of 10 points) for 2 star rated entries. For 1 star rating, they will continue to lose 15 points.
  5. Winning a contest:We have increased the number of points from 100 to 250
  6. Earning a Bonus: If you receive a bonus from CH, you will now earn 150 points instead of 75 points previously.

We have also modified the rules for maximum number of submissions allowed per contest. The ability to submit additional entries to a contest is now based upon two factors:

a) Your last 6 months rating score (which is calculated as Number of 4 or 5 Star rated entries/ Total number of Rated Entries)

b) Ratings on current contest

Here are the specific rules for number of entries allowed per contest:

  • Contestants with six months rating score of 5% or below: 5 entries
  • Contestants with six months rating score between 5% and 10%: 10 entries
  • Contestants with six months rating score between 10% and 15%: 15 entries
  • Contestants with six months rating score between 15% and 20%: 20 entries
  • Contestants with six months rating score of 20% or higher: 30 entries

In addition, if you receive at least one high rating (4 or 5 star) on the current contest, you will be allowed to submit bonus 10 entries.

Some examples to illustrate this:
Example 1: You have a rating score of 22%, and you receive one 4 star rating on current contest. You will be allowed to submit a total of 40 entries in the current contest (30 based on your six months rating score, and 10 bonus based upon your current contest rating).

Example 2: You have a rating score of 3%, and you receive two 4 star ratings on current contest. You will be allowed to submit a total of 15 entries in the current contest (5 based on your six months rating score, and 10 bonus based upon your current contest rating).

Example 3: You have a rating score of 18%, and you have not received any high ratings on current contest so far. You will be allowed to submit a total of 20 entries in the current contest.

Therefore, the maximum number of ratings anyone can submit to a contest is 40. On the other hand, the minimum number anyone can submit is 5.

You can see your 6 month rating score on the “Submit Entry” page.

Sorry about the long post, but we hope that these changes will help in rewarding those users who demonstrate a consistent level of high quality submissions, while it will limit the participation from those users who misuse the platform by submitting entries which do not follow CH brief.

I think this is ridiculous. I am only allowed to submit 10 entries now. I am not happy with this change. Very, very, very upsetting here!! Punish the veterans and good contestants because of a few bad contestants? You know who the bad ones are, who send spam entries and vulgar entries, so punish them, not everyone. I am completely aggravated with all this now.


Can you please make these changes retroactive? I am in the top 22% and lost nearly 4000 points in two weeks.


I have to say looking at the “meet our top winners”

Top in contests won
Top in Highest earnings won
Top in consistently receiving high rating

and we all know they are phenomenal so CONGRATS top creatives for all your hard work on SH.

Moretal congrats – You now get only 10 entries.
NayNay congrats – You now get only 15 entries.
Lightless congrats --You now get only 10 entries.

I find this appalling.


Thanks for sharing your feedback. We look at this a bit differently. This change is not meant to “punish” the veterans and good contestants as you pointed out. It is a meant to incrementally reward those contestants who show a pattern of significantly higher CH ratings than others.

Some contestants on our platform receive 1 good rating for every 100 entries they submit (1% rating score), and there are others who receive more than 30 good ratings for every 100 entries they submit (> 30% rating score). We believe our platform should reward those users who receive consistently higher ratings by allowing them an ability to submit a higher number of entries.

We also understand that sometimes contest holders do not look at rating guidelines consistently. Therefore, we are looking at aggregated ratings over a 6 month period, to eliminate any issues due to inconsistency.

Finally, if you receive even a single high rating on any contest, you automatically receive 10 extra submissions. Therefore, even if your overall 6 month rating is low for any reason, you have the ability to submit 10 extra entries in a contest if you receive at least 1 good rating.

We have also attempted to address the concerns related to point system by adding points for 3 star ratings, as well as by reducing the deduction for 2 star ratings.

All these changes are meant to promote an environment which incrementally rewards those contestants who continue to show a pattern of high ratings. I hope you are looking at this objectively across these aspects.

One final thought, I hope you appreciate that we have been extremely transparent about our thought process, as well as communication related to these changes (even at the risk of our competitors reading this level of details about our strategy in a public forum). We believe it is important for our community to see the rationale for these changes. We certainly value those members who have been on this platform for several years and we are continuing to plan other means by which you can benefit from the points you have earned over these years (Best Entry concept is one of those examples, there are more to come in future).

I don’t care about points and never did. I cared about being able to be creative, enter assorted ideas and test the waters. Names are subjective. I give the same entry to one accounting company and get a 5 star, I enter it in another and get a 1 star. We are trying to meet their requests (which are constantly changed as they see entries come in) and I am fine with that, we are also stifled by contest holders who do not rate, only rate the first day and then don’t come back to rate more. If we are left unrated, we at a standstill. If we have such small limitations and they do finally come back to rate more, time runs out of the contest.


I think your commitment to transparency is awesome and personally I do not feel affected much by this new change. I get 20 entries and potentially 30 so it’s fine for me. I’ll probably do better in fact with those 3 point scores. However, with regard to seasoned namers who have proven themselves to be great regardless of percentages due to their submission style, it does not seem right to me. In my company, when changes take place that could negatively impact seasoned top performers, they will usually grandfather those people in. So perhaps SH could consider such a program for those who have already won a certain number of contests. Say give them 30 entries to start as they have represented your site well. Do you really want to take the more out of moretal, say nay to naynay or yank the heart out of Heraty ? If you do that all you’ll be left with is “y”?!


It has only been 8 days since the New Point System (Round 1) went live. I appreciate @Dan and the SH team responding as soon as they did, I can’t imagine what it’d be like in 1-2 months.

I think it would help some contestants feel a little better if they got back some of their points.


Well, I have to agree with Jackie here on this change not being kind to veterans.

Not everyone has the same creative style. My style is, how do i put it, more trial-and-error based and involves stumbling upon "Winner " names by simply having much more ideas, concepts and names, most of them rating-duds but vital in getting to the “Winner” names. As Edison eloquently put - “I have not failed. I’ve just found 10,000 ways that won’t work”, but as you can see, this style doesn’t bode well for my 6 months ratings average (6.8%) or entry limit (10).

Would be nice if Squadhelp gave some leeway to the creatives who have proven themselves over the years regardless of their 6 month rating averages. Surely they have done something right.


I am definitely not as accomplished as you, Jackie or a number of others who have been naming much longer. But I would not have accomplished what I have on SH if I hadn’t continually submitted a large number of entries and worked with the feedback.
The best solutions are those that produce the ideal names, whether they come with 2 tries or 40 tries. That’s the whole point of the site.


How does this system affect newer creatives? Let us say Joe newbie joined a week ago, submitted 10 names and got a 4 star in one of them, 3 star in one and 8 unrated. Does he get to submit 30 entries?

Does this system favor beginner’s luck over veteran credentials?


While I appreciate everyone’s concerns on these changes, please keep in mind that if you want to submit 40 names, you can still do so. The point of these changes is to set the initial limit based upon contestant’s past ratings. If you submit 15 names initially, and find that the CH did not like any of them, you still have the ability to withdraw your entries and submit more names.

This change is only meant to act as a throttling mechanism so that there is an initial limit on how many entries you can submit, before getting ANY feedback from CH.

What we want to avoid is users submitting 30/ 40 names before getting any feedback from CH. If you want to build upon any names or ideas that the CH likes, you can continue to do so by withdrawing other entries that they did not like.

Regarding the ratings from CH, here are some stats to consider:

In July, 19904 of the 40451 submitted entries received ratings from CH (49% rated entries). In September, this number has already increased to 62%. We are implementing several capabilities and notifications to ensure there is an early feedback on your submission so that you can continue to refine your direction based on CH ratings.

We intend to stay with this change, as we believe this will reduce the number of abandoned contests, and allow the users to continue to submit more entries based upon feedback from the CH.


@Dan. Go the extra mile, you made some very good changes, but why not take this initial round of feedback and tweak it a bit, then set it in stone for a while? Jackie is a MVP and she has a great point. This new formula is biased too far toward defining best creative by “least number of entries producing highest percentage of better ratings”, and light on awarding value to the pure number of wins. I’m thinking wins trump just about everything, they are in fact why the CH is here, and they do represent ultimate CH satisfaction do they not? Simply adding something like an extra 10-20 initial entry allowance for every 5 wins might reduce the current bias and properly award our consistent winners. There are different “creative formulas” for producing the best creative solutions, why have a point system that says one is better than the other? Lets just reward best solution producers, period. Here’s the KEY Dan, your point about withdrawing and re-entering doesn’t take care of the possible downside to MVP’s who happen to have a creative style like Jackie. In the real world, many CHs don’t rate entries, delay rating entries, don’t give enough feedback (sometimes not a lick of it), use the point system entirely wrong, etc. In the meantime Jackie might be stuck on the sideline? The numbers do show what may have been an unintended bias. During the last 6 mo. I think Jackie has 15 wins versus my 4, but our creative style happens to be different, I get 30 initial entries and she gets 10? Ultimately Jackie is doing a better job of serving your clientele than I am yet the new points system clearly gives me more reward, and puts Jackie at a disadvantage. I hope you can fix this, creatives like Jackie are earning the right to an equitable point system each and every day.


Hey everyone,

I am fairly new to this site and thought I’d give my feedback on the current ratings/point system. I’ve only been part of the SquadHelp community for about a week and am already finding myself discouraged with how the points and ratings work.

I made and entry to a contest and the CH replied to my entry saying I was on the right track and asked me to make more submissions. After doing so, they then gave me 2-star ratings on that entry and all other entries I made based on their feedback. That took my overall rating score down significantly and decreased the number of entries I could submit from 20 to 5. I have been extremely thoughtful with my submissions and have had a similar experience with several other contests. My low-rated entries now account for about 80% of my total score.

I find this very discouraging, and it has made me consider stop participating all-together. I know it’s probably very difficult to find a solution that works well for everyone, but I wanted to share my experience so far. I consider myself a fairly creative person and I love taking some time to think-up ideas that might help others with their business. But when the contest holder is unfair with ratings and feedback or doesn’t understand how it works or how their ratings impact us, it creates more of a negative experience than positive one.

I can tell that the team at SquadHelp has been very appreciative and open to feedback from users. I hope this helps somehow!


My two cents is a hierarchy system:

Firstly creative has won over x amount of contests, 30 submissions plus additional for 4 or 5 star ratings within those thirty.
Obviously if the creative is winning contests they are finding what the CH is after whether that takes 5 entries or 30. At the end of the day they have found a winning name.

Secondly, if creative has won under x amount of contests take into account rating %. So 20% and over gets 30 entries, 15-20% gets 20 entries etc. plus additional entries for 4 and 5 star ratings.


Veterans aren’t disadvantaged. New comers who are hitting a higher rating % aren’t disadvantaged. I guess the only group who are, are new comers with the trial and error approach but I think that is better then docking your vets

To all contestants: Check and make sure your wins are being posted for the right month. My October 1 win is being shown on my profile as a September win. I notified SH, but check yours if you’ve won recently.


i wasnt sure if the win was from when the contest started or when it finished

@emilybj1 and @Skevans, thanks for sharing your feedback. We will continue to evaluate the point system, as well as rules for limiting the entries. For example, we have now increased the initial limits for users who feature in our leaderboard, regardless of their points. We will continue to evaluate and make additional changes to ensure that the users who are genuinely putting in a good effort do not get discouraged due to point system.

In case of new users, since the total number of entries are very small, their rating percentage can vary quite rapidly. Therefore, we will likely make some changes to ensure that the newer contestants don’t see too many rapid fluctuations in their max entries for an initial period.

@auntshommy, on user details page, we show the total number of wins against the contests participated for the same month. Basically it shows the number of wins in the same month as the month when contest was launched.

Dan, if that’s the case, something still isn’t right. I am shown on the September Leaderboard as having one win, but my profile shows 2 wins for September and none for October. Normally, I wouldn’t have noticed the date of my wins, but one can make the Leaderboard based on the date they’re counted. So if one win was counted for September’s Leaderboard, shouldn’t the October 1 win be counted with October’s wins? This is potentially going to affect a lot of contestants. Thanks.