Im a newbie here, but one thing that has kept me here after winning my first contest was that this is like family…a family that cares, a family that shares…this basic premise of sharing and caring is what keeps SH leagues ahead of other purely materialistic platforms…I would rather be sharing with my fellow contestants who have spent their time and energy coming up with a name from their heart…Being a Creative person I truly believe that God resides in all of us and to to Win at the cost of other peoples sentiments would be harsh and unfair…Also I believe in Karma and what goes around shall surely come around one day or the other…Im all for the existing system and would honestly want SH to stay the same…Sharing and Spreading Love and Hope as always…God Bless
Here is bit more information that might help answer your questions:
Not all Naming contests include Audience Testing or Trademark validation. It is typically done in Platinum and Managed contests, but it can be added in other contest packages as well.
The Trademark validation is done by a Licensed Trademark Attorney who evaluates the Trademark risk based on the class of the business.
If a winner is not selected in a contest, it doesn’t necessarily mean that the names failed the Trademark validation or Audience Testing. There can be many other reasons - for example, the company decided to not move forward with the venture due to other unrelated issues, they decided to go with their own name that they had previously thought of, etc.
This change will not necessarily mean higher payouts for everyone. However it will result in larger payouts for those whose names do get included in the validation steps (e.g. Trademark or Audience Testing). One way to think about this is that if a CH chose 3 to 6 names for additional validation, then these names were likely in the final consideration before the contest was abandoned and therefore should share the award equally.
However, as mentioned previously, we are indifferent to one method vs the other. We will decide the final policy based upon the feedback shared by creatives in this thread. So if you do feel strongly one way or another, it is important that you share your feedback so that we can consider it.
I think this would be a good change to try out, then ask for feedback after a trial period. At that time, we could revert to the current system if the majority preferred it.
Just putting my vote in for keeping it how it is please. I think it’s the fairest way. I’d hate to have a love it and not win anything!
Happy to go with whatever is easiest for SH though.
more people getting something seems more encouraging (ie sticking with the current system)
@Seezall, what I left out in my comment is “all things being the same”… in other words, if your names are still hitting loves/shortlists, then the payouts are the same or better. If you aren’t receiving splits now as you’ve mentioned before than this new policy won’t change it. Receiving splits under the new systems depends entirely on shortlisting first, followed by loves, likes, etc. when there are no shortlists.
@grant What percentage of contests would you say do the Audience Testing & Trademark Validation?
@Grant How many contests that do go through audience testings and validation are being abandoned?
That already happens though. A love is not necessarily shortlisted.
I do see the new symbol indicating one of my entries is going through the process. However, how am I to know which contest is going through the process of Trademarking and Audience testing ? Can you please provide a symbol on those contests that opt to use these validation techniques? So, then it is clear that my shortlisted entry is still a contender vs. me thinking I am a shortlisted contender, yet this CH did not opt for further validation, and my shortlist entry has no markings, now unknowing if I am still a contender. False hope.
However, my original vote is to keep things how they are
I vote to keep the process as it stands now. As someone who doesn’t win many contests but does receive a nice share of high ratings, the current policy works well for me. This new policy may be just another hurdle to jump through. Thank you for asking for our input, it’s greatly appreciated @grant
[quote=“AbleBrands, post:24, topic:2472”]
I’d hate to have a love it and not win anything![/quote]
Hmmmm, I’ve had Love Its that didn’t make the shortlist - And - I’ve had Love Its that did make the shortlist, without any wins - Plus, I’ve had Shortlisted names that didn’t get any of the splits
Soooooo, am I missing something?
You should ask SH about that because since the shortlist split policy started, you should have gotten a split if your name was shortlisted. The only time I have seen a deviation in this, there’s been a note on the contest as to why. (Usually it is that the CH decided to split the award between only a few people).
You are only missing that I’m a numpty . I should have said shortlisted (not love its).
Keep it the same
(and limit the number of shortlisted names allowed)
I think a lot of people will be missing out on payouts with this new system. Sorry folks, just my opinion.
Ha I was thinking we needed a poll too!
Side note: the discussion is helpful when deciding where to place your vote. There are drawbacks to the new way I didn’t think of until someone posted it.
lol yes a short list should probably be short
I would like the existing system to be preserved. Thanks.