Updates to Point System

Ty Dan. And I do appreciate as well the fact we are getting great communication with SH . It felt like we were in the dark for a long time so kudos to you guys for the new connection with the namers.
Now…if we could just prevent a lot of those domain parkers I’d be ever so happy.
Ty again for your reply :sunflower:


As of now, there are 20+ contests pending winner selection. These contests came before the new rating system was implemented. I think many will get huge points cut if these recent CHs are unaware of the change. Maybe SH should announce through email or if there’s a better way, at the very least to all the current CHs and all active users.

The new Point System is quite a big change IMO. Maybe for the time being SH could suspend some of the aspects/rules effected by this change, for example new users that have joined in recent months may be unable to submit anymore entries when their points are in the negative.

1 Like

I just received two 2-star ratings in a contest: I’m out 20 points.

If I win a contest, I get a whopping 100 points.

Losing incentive here, for sure. I’m hesitant to try again with this CH – and I’m glad I didn’t enter more the first go-'round.

You usually “pepper” a CH anyway don’t you Stalias in theory you can now get four 2 stars to one 4 star to end up with net zero balance. Granted some minor tweaks will probably need to be made! as far as the 35 or so people I’ve come to know here I don’t think any of use will have a problem overtime seeing our points rise more than they fall

unless you submit 40 names off the bat and use your best entries every contest

Your out 20 but added 40 just to enter. So…you still gained 20. Correct?

1 Like

No, I’m not a pepperer. Some contests I get on a roll and go with it. Others I just do a few. I guess, on average, though, I’d do maybe 5-6 entries of different styles. You know, trying to gauge what the CH liked. But now the “safe” place to stop is 3 entries – any more and you risk losing points.

It’s just sad, because I’d rather be thinking about names than points, in my quest to help CHs and make a little money for myself.

1 Like

I’m just grateful the new points system started after the recent global contest. I lost well over 100 points there without grade deflation! :stuck_out_tongue_closed_eyes:


You’ll be just fine just do what you been doing

1 Like

Plus you should have gotten the flat 40 for entering the contest too. I’m thinking there may be a lag between the ratings and the points. Could contests outside of the range of the feed have some effect if the CH suddenly starts rating?? I’ve noticed some weird stuff too.

I agree Jose 5 is hard to come by maybe a bit less for a 2 star as long a chs are clear on ratings getting 1star is where we should be hit hardest -20 points or so

1 Like

I think there’s a lot of value in 2-rated entries. I always interpreted them to mean that I was on the right track, but the CH just knew already that for whatever reason, the entry wasn’t going to be used, possibly because there were other companies with similar names and the CH wanted something completely different. Losing the 2 points for the submission always seemed reasonable to me. Likewise: 3s are generally considered to be completely on track and as others have observed, sometimes win. I wish we could go back to receiving the submission points for 3s.


Yes. 2s always struck me as a “good” wash: You met the brief requirements, but weren’t able to read the CHs mind. No harm, no foul – CHs had a chance to note what they didn’t want, and creatives had a great springboard for new ideas going in a different direction.


Personally, I think losing 10 and 15 points for 2 star and one star entries are a bit high. Winning a contest should have a more substantial point prize. Here are my suggestions:

Winning a new badge: 150 points
Winning a contest with under 500 entries 500 points
Winning a contest with over 500 entries 1000 points
Winning A Bonus 150 Points
2 star entries minus 5 points
1 star entries minus 10 points

Thank you.


Great suggestion/ratings spectrum, Songslurp!
Last night, I was mulling over this topic, and I remembered that many of the biggest 1-awarding CHs are those who have unrealistic ideas of the kinds of names available in the domain marketplace. For instance, they want a cell phone name with 8 letters or less that’s meaningful but sounds like nothing else out there and has an unregistered domain. They are notorious 1-givers. I think some CHs are very unrealistic about the kinds of names contestants can produce for them. That doesn’t mean we have to enter every contest, or submit a lot of entries in these contests, But it’s something to think about when devising ratings scores.


I kinda wish that the first initial entry that is rated in each contest by the contest holder awarded NO Points, no matter the rating, This would give us a fair chance to even see if our ideas are going in the same direction of the CH, without being penalized right off the bat.

Then we as creatives could have that opportunity to either submit 1 entry and wait for a direction, or choose to submit a variety of options, and see where it goes. (hopefully that makes sense), Currently it seems that while I think I have a solid, creative idea, the CH has other things in mind and 2 seems to be my “lucky number” :\


Late to the party here…One question that keeps rolling through my mind: does SH really know what they have here? The beauty of it? How will the current point system end up changing that? (this is being asked with the utmost respect). I used to spend most of my time on CrowdSpring even after starting to work on SH, but I slowly found my affinity for SH growing. Now I hardly ever find myself on CS. I’ve been spending my time here because the experience felt better, and more importantly, I found SH’s system to be far more true the the spirit of creativity. On CS it seems like CH’s mark anything that’s not close to their name vision a single star, and with their “reputation score” system that makes it impossible to think outside the box without beating up your reputation. It feels so creatively restrictive over there. There is such a feeling of frustration in general over there, more on that in a second. I started to see and feel such a different experience on SH. Wow, having the ability to submit truly outside the box ideas, explore WITH the CHs, get real-time feedback, re-direct, “flesh-out” concepts with CHs. What an amazing fertile ground for creativity! Simply superior. Sure there are trade-offs, and I commend SH for addressing them, but tread lightly my friends. You really have something here to protect. I wonder if there is too much of a focus on the total number of entries and whether that implies lower quality, or negatively impacts CH experience? Back to my earlier comment about the general feeling of frustration at CS, as it relates directly to this question. If you read the brief updates at CS, CHs seem very frustrated with the lack of creativity. There are so many CH complaints about following the brief direction TOO closely. Stifled creativity? Fear rather than freedom to explore? Sure, the projects over there typically end up with 400 entries or so. Are they really higher in quality? The proof may be in the pudding as they say. So many contests go “radio silent” on CS and end up unrewarded, with CHs refusing to pick a winner. Next. Are we too concerned about the question of whether creatives are “gaming” the points system here? Did it really matter? I wonder if CHs are really greatly influenced in picking a creative’s idea by whether the creative has 10,000 or 20,000 points? I think it mostly has to do with the number of wins a creative has, and of course the “best idea” probably trumps everything, as it should. Lets not forget there was actually a reason for giving entry submission points, an incentive to participate. Now that we can buy exposure with “best entry”, points will have real value. Yikes, that sounds concerning with regard to the “fear/creativity stifle” issue, and the impact that ultimately has on CH satisfaction? Ok, it’s way too early to tell, but this ability to buy exposure, and the current point system has my willingness to offer outside the box ideas quite stifled so far. With a little tweaking, that stifling effect should dissipate. I’ve read many good tweaking suggestions on this thread. The latest by Songslurp on winning entry award is a no brainer. The current points system only offers the equivalent award of only two 5 star entries for the so incredibly elusive win! My two cents: bring back at least a point for submitting, it is an incentive to participate, and will offset the penalty for exploring outside the box (wow that sounds bad). You might say what about the 40 points for entering? Not the same at all. Does the up front 40 points really offer an incentive to explore, engage, and CONTINUE to push through the process? That 40 points evaporates in a matter of moments during the process of exploring, engaging, and pushing through. The high point awards on 4 and 5 stars really won’t offset the current deductions for 1 and 2 stars, even for the best creatives. It is really, really, really hard to get on the “same page” as the CH without sitting down in front of them and having a conversation. To get on the same page you have to explore, test the waters, which usually means a good amount 1’s and 2’s (more when exploring less literal names, which often have the most lasting brand value). CHs seem to award a limited number of 4 and 5’s, and settle on mostly 3’s for the creatives who are offering quality ideas to help the CH flesh out their brand name vision, particularly as the contest lingers on. Bottom line the math doesn’t add up for “protecting” the creative spirit of SH’s platform. It really doesn’t. I’m a math wiz :slight_smile: Maybe something like: 40 to enter, 1 per entry, 50 for 5 star, 25 for a 4 star, 5 for a 3 star, -5 for a 2 star, and -10 for a single star. Here’s how I might think about it: “Ok, I might drop 100 - 175 points finding the CH’s page (10 to 15 two star, 5 to 10 single star), but if you add up 40 to enter, 40 for entries, 25 for five 3 stars, 50 for two 4 stars, and an occasional 50 for a 5 star, the math doesn’t look that bad, I’ll give it my best CREATIVE effort”. With the current system, same scenario, “I start 175-300 in the hole, I get 40 to enter, 80 for two 4 stars, I don’t feel the freedom to explore, if I want to protect my points to “buy” exposure”. I’m really not a math wiz, but that looks about right. Please chime in and help flesh out the numbers, as I am sure we’d all love to see SH protect the wonderful platform for creativity that it has been!

Sorry so long, I just want to try and help. Disclaimer: I’m no expert at any of this. I entered my first naming contest 6 months ago. I’ve won the same paltry amount of contests on both SH and CS, but I am enjoying the creative outlet, the money I’ve earned, and I am trying to get better at this. Best regards, CPN


CPN that was beautiful. I wouldn’t change a word.

Thanks everyone for sharing additional feedback on this topic. The intent of these changes is NOT to stifle creativity, and we will continue to make any necessary changes in points system once we have an opportunity to see the impact of some of the changes already made. We don’t want to make too many changes too frequently - because we wouldnt be able to measure the impact in a clear fashion.

The negative points are meant to deter those contestants who do not pay attention to the contest brief, and use automated name generators to submit entries. To illustrate this, here are some of the entries submitted to one of the contests by a contestant:


We don’t want the contest holders to abandon their contests because they get overwhelmed with a large number of names that do not add value.

We have many creative individuals on our platform and the goal is not to stifle the creativity. However, in order for their hard work to stand out and be counted, we must implement actions and penalties that would deter those contestants who consistently receive poor ratings due to these “spray and prey” techniques.

Your feedback is noted and we will make some adjustments to the point system in the near future based on the impact of the current changes.


Well put Dan, ( as far as swamping the CH ) Definitely need a larger sample size to determine the points as well , I also think It would be safe to say that most of the points criteria will be measured against the longer term and more serious users, without making it too hard for an up and comer to join the ranks.

1 Like