Oddbean

- however many I can get (so far 2 including me) need moar - if I’m having hard time finding judges don’t think we can rotate - if they want to right ? can propose that to them - none right ? let’s move past this all together - also none ? - quality + laughs ?

I’m happy to judge, but selfishly I like making memes so wouldn’t want to do it EVERY week. But I would like to see a more formalized, hashed-out proposal for how this would work. Maybe come up with a working panel of people to help define some of these logistics. I know I’ve spoken to @corndalorian about how this would work in the past. I’m sure he could give his input as well. As for specific criteria for judging a meme, I think it is obviously very subjective but you could also come up with specific categories to help the judges think through it systematically (eg, How did the contestants incorporate the subject, how original was it, visual appeal, viral potential, clarity, etc).

Yeah most people I’ve talked to want to participate not actually judge, finding judges is easier said than done /: but I’ll see what we can do! ill put you down for next weekend then, so far 3 judges!

Like I said, I’m happy to help out and judge. But I still would want to see a formalized approach to this. Put something together, publish it in the open and get feedback. If you’re going to have judges then you might want to come up with a “scorecard” for them to fill out. The other idea I thought of which could be cool is having people submit anonymously and then your Nostr Memes account just posts all of the memes for people to see and react to. I’m honestly ok with keeping one of the criteria “likes/zaps” because then it takes into account what the overall community thinks as well besides just individual judges.

No what I said was to have a panel of judges, but one of the judging criteria (out if many) is what the community thinks based on likes/zaps/comments, etc. I don’t think you should get rid of community preference altogether. I just don’t think you should solely rely on reactions to judge this thing.

Sorry guys I’ve been out with the family today so trying to get caught up. @𝕾𝖊𝖗 𝕾𝖑𝖊𝖊𝖕𝖞 you’re amazing coordinating these and pushing this forward, and being open discussion on ways to make it even better. Doc and I have discussed some ideas and one we’ve talked about that I particularly like is is a tournament-style approach. Nothing too complicated so it’s still fun, and I think it can help make things more fair and also provide judges each week. Basically here’s the idea: - Each tournament could be 5 weeks at a time. 4 weeks of qualifying rounds, and then the 5th week would be the final. - Have a consistent sponsored prize purse for the first 4 weeks, and a larger sponsored prize purse for the final. - Each person can only win once during the duration of the weekly qualifying matches. - The 1st, 2nd, and 3rd place winners each week would then be expected to serve as judges for the following week, along with the sponsor and you or someone else if you want to participate. 5 total judges each week. Simple majority vote of judges wins. - After the weekly qualifying matches conclude, hold a final. Only the winners from that round of qualifying matches are eligible to enter the final. - The panel of judges for the final could be formed of other contestants or special invited guest judges.

I put our conversation in ChatGPT and this is what it spit out: Based on your conversation and the input from Doc, Sleepy, and others, here's a potential framework for your meme competition that addresses the challenges you've identified, like the issue of fairness, voting methods, and the selection of judges. ### **1. Judging Panel Structure** - **Rotating Judges**: As suggested, the winners from each week (1st, 2nd, and 3rd place) can act as judges for the following week. This allows for more community involvement and keeps fresh perspectives in the judging panel. - **Sponsor or Special Guest Judges**: Each week, include the sponsor or a guest judge from the community, such as a prominent figure (Doc, Corndalorian, etc.). This will keep the judging panel dynamic and connected to the broader community. - **5 Judges Each Week**: The weekly judging panel should consist of 5 members (3 winners from the previous week + 2 chosen guests/sponsors), with a simple majority vote determining the winner. ### **2. Tournament-Style Format** - **5-Week Tournament Cycle**: - **4 Weeks of Qualifiers**: Each week serves as a qualifying round for the final. - **Final in Week 5**: Only winners of the qualifying rounds can participate. A separate, larger prize for the final will make it exciting and competitive. - **Weekly Prize**: Have consistent, smaller prize pools for the qualifiers and a larger one for the final. - **No Repeat Wins in Qualifiers**: To encourage more participation and fairness, a participant can only win once in the qualifiers. However, they can still participate in the final if they’ve won a previous qualifier. ### **3. Criteria for Judging Memes** Here’s a breakdown of specific categories that can be used for scoring memes, which could help the panel think systematically: - **Humor/Entertainment (10 points)**: How funny or entertaining is the meme? Does it elicit laughter or a strong reaction from the audience? - **Creativity/Originality (10 points)**: Is the meme unique or does it provide a fresh take on a familiar theme? Did the contestant create something new or remix an existing meme format in a clever way? - **Relevance to Theme (10 points)**: How well does the meme align with the theme of the week (if applicable)? Does it relate to the broader conversation or topic of the contest? - **Visual Appeal (5 points)**: Is the meme visually striking? This includes image quality, use of colors, and overall aesthetic appeal. - **Shareability/Viral Potential (5 points)**: Would the meme perform well if shared more widely? Does it have the potential to go viral? - **Cultural Awareness (5 points)**: Does the meme avoid being offensive while still being playful or edgy? Total possible score: **45 points** The panel can score each meme on these criteria, and the highest-scoring meme wins. If there’s a tie, the panel can vote again, or a tiebreaker criterion (such as most zaps or reactions) could be used. ### **4. Community Involvement (Zaps/Reactions)** Instead of solely relying on zaps and reactions (which can be spoofed or influenced by large accounts), community voting can be incorporated as a **weighted factor**: - **Zaps or Reactions as a Judge Vote Equivalent**: The meme with the most zaps can be given the same weight as one judge’s vote, or it can break a tie. - **Separate People’s Choice Award**: Alternatively, have a separate “People’s Choice Award” based solely on community reactions, allowing for some community input without it being the primary factor in deciding the winner. ### **5. Logistics for Running the Competition** - **Submission Deadline**: Define when memes must be submitted each week. - **Judging Period**: Allow judges 1–2 days to review and score memes. - **Results Announcement**: Announce winners at the end of each week and reveal who the judges will be for the next round. ### **6. Example Judging Sheet for Each Judge** | Meme Entry | Humor (10) | Creativity (10) | Relevance (10) | Visual Appeal (5) | Shareability (5) | Cultural Awareness (5) | Total (45) | |--------------|------------|-----------------|----------------|-------------------|------------------|------------------------|------------| | Meme #1 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 4 | 4 | 5 | 40 | | Meme #2 | 10 | 7 | 8 | 5 | 3 | 4 | 37 | ### **7. Fairness & Visibility** To address the concerns about visibility: - **Equal Promotion**: Ensure all submissions receive equal exposure through reposts and engagement. Judges and prominent figures can help promote all entries so everyone has a fair chance of being seen. - **Focus on Quality Over Quantity**: Reinforce that the quality and humor of the meme matter more than just how many likes or zaps it gets. ### **8. Final Tournament Structure** - Once the weekly rounds are over, the final contest will only involve the weekly winners. - Have a new set of judges for the final, possibly made up of prominent community members or invited guests. This framework should help formalize the process while keeping it fun and inclusive, addressing both the judging fairness and the issue of uneven visibility in decentralized platforms like Nostr. Let me know if you’d like any further refinements!

Appreciate that @corndalorian thank you for taking the time! sounds great! I’m gonna think hard about this and see how I can find sponsors for the 4 weeks as well as the big prize pool for the final (maybe some announcements will get us somewhere) and then how the logistics for everyone voting on time while being on different time zones would work (hard to hold people accountable for something like this, specially on Sundays) aside from that I can see it working