[Alex Pepple]

Dear Eratosphereans - this happens to be our maiden double-blind sonnet bake-off. So, I'd have been surprised if this first dry run which happens to be also a live run proved to be a home run. So, what can we do but apply a tweak again, on the run. I believe, though, that the earlier tweak is the least possible one that can be made under circumstances. And I believe it's a fair one since I did not announce it after the submission deadline, but with still plenty of time for anyone who might be already affected to send in a replacement submission, and for those who haven't yet submitted to send in something in line with it.

With that said, and continuing in the spirit of 'tweakery' to appease some who are yet to be appeased due to the earlier tweak, how about we define a little better what 'googleable' means in the context of this bake-off and thus make things a little more deterministic--

A sonnet will be deemed googleable and thus disqualified as a finalist (while still giving the author the opportunity to submit a replacement sonnet -- although the replacement might fail to achieve finalist status) if:

1) The sonnet appears on the first or second page only of Google search results with "TITLE" as the search string (where "TITLE" is the full string for the sonnet's title, enclosed in quotes),

AND/OR

2) The sonnet appears on the first or second page only of Google search results with "FIRST LINE" as the search string (where "FIRST LINE" is the full string for the sonnet's first line, enclosed in quotes).

Note that the above excludes the inclusion of the author's name in any of the above search strings or separately (since we're making the assumption that specific author names will be unknown to the DG, and to the bake-off participants).

I hope this makes matters a bit simpler/easier and more deterministic for those who might be having problems with the recent 'non-googleable' tweak.

Cheers,
...Alex

[Shaun J. Russell]

Damn, I guess that means I'll have to withdraw my entry, "Blurm Glaff Pir Gloyso"...

[Marcia Karp]

I think some of us don't understand what the point of the rule change is. Since it doesn't kick in until after the judging, it doesn't affect the double-blindness -- that of the two choosing levels -- so it isn't clear what is at stake All I can figure is that you are aiming at members who Google, then unfairly praise or blame based on authorship. Is this so distorting to the event that it is the authors who have to suffer, rather than those who aren't good sports? For some, the main draw of the event is to have the chance of being read by the guest and hear what he or she has to say.

I don't see why people should submit just any sonnet they have, rather than the one they think best. Marybeth gave a very good reason for her choice; others may not think they have more than one sonnet that is worthy.

The new wrinkle is strange because.

• Google adapts its results to each user
• the number of results per page is settable, so not everyone's first page will have the same number
• titles and first lines vary in how common they are in the language -- the more common, the less likely the poem will be high in the results.

I've tried, but don't understand what problem you are trying to solve and I hope by my tedium that I've argued for keeping things simple, as the original rules were.

Your labors are difficult enough, Alex, without having to imagine every possible flaw. Countries have to keep working to improve election fairness. Your original rules seem fair enough to me; the new ones seem unfair for no good reason.

Best,
Marcia

[Alex Pepple]

Originally Posted by Marcia Karp

I think some of us don't understand what the point of the rule change is. Since it doesn't kick in until after the judging, it doesn't affect the double-blindness -- that of the two choosing levels -- so it isn't clear what is at stake All I can figure is that you are aiming at members who Google, then unfairly praise or blame based on authorship.

I don't understand what you don't understand about it, Marcia. 1) Yes, you can still submit googleable sonnets, but they will be disqualified (ahead of the finalists posting by the Host/DG) if they're chosen as one of the DG's finalists, although you'll be given a chance to send a replacement sonnet, which might not qualify as finalist--so, it would be advisable to submit only non-googleable sonnets to avoid the aforementioned iteration. And, 2) What's the sense or effectiveness of double-anonymity if anyone can google a posted finalist and instantly know who the author is?

...Alex

[Shaun J. Russell]

Originally Posted by Alex Pepple

I don't understand what you don't understand about it, Marcia. 1) Yes, you can still submit googleable sonnets, but they will be disqualified (ahead of the finalists posting by the Host/DG) if they're chosen as one of the DG's finalists, although you'll be given a chance to send a replacement sonnet, which might not qualify as finalist--so, it would be advisable to submit only non-googleable sonnets to avoid the aforementioned iteration. And, 2) What's the sense or effectiveness of double-anonymity if anyone can google a posted finalist and instantly know who the author is?

...Alex

But wouldn't it just be easier to just say "unpublished work only" as it has been in many previous bakeoffs?

I'm fine with published or unpublished sonnets...but it seems odd to strike a middle ground between two fairly objective poles.

Always appreciate what you do, Alex -- just a touch confused by what Ann called the "shifting goalposts."

[Alex Pepple]

Originally Posted by E. Shaun Russell

But wouldn't it just be easier to just say "unpublished work only" as it has been in many previous bakeoffs?"

It would be easier, Shaun, but it will be also limiting because there are many fine sonnets published in print journals, poetry collections and anthologies that are 'non-googleable' by my definition of the term above. So, more people should be able to submit who might not have, were we to limit things to unpublished work only.

Cheers,
...Alex

[Marcia Karp]

I'm sorry, Alex. I was thrown off by the finalist clause; I see now I was wrong to think that you share my confidence that none of the judges will stoop to Googling.

Best,
Marcia

[Alex Pepple]

Great Marcia ... I'm glad I've filled in all the blanks I inadvertently left out in my earlier take on the matter. So, yes, before posting of the finalists begins, I'll verify the finalists to make sure the DG didn't include anything googleable. If I'll go into the iteration of contacting the author for a replacement sonnet, which might fail to make it as one of the finalists that get posted.

Cheers,
...Alex

[Julie Steiner]

I feel a villanelle coming on...

[Cyn Neely]

I'm so depressed, I can't find my published sonnets on Google. I feel like a failure. So maybe I'll send one in ;-)