Author Topic: IWPS 2011 Questions  (Read 11154 times)

randomcelestial

  • Rules Rewrite Committee
  • Sonnet
  • ***
  • Posts: 145
    • View Profile
Re: IWPS 2011 Questions
« Reply #15 on: August 24, 2011, 06:10:17 PM »
Inkera:

1. You've contradicted yourself / been unclear multiple times in this thread. When asked for clarification, you quoted yourself with no additional text, and when I asked more questions with specific wordings, you've ignored the request / told me it's the same question.

2. If you told me you priority was given to redheads, and then the list was all blondes, I would say something was wrong. Would you then tell me I'm perceiving it incorrectly? Because this is exactly what's going on: in 2009, at least 4 poets who attended / slammed at local qualifiers and lost (and I can point out examples if necessary) were given priority over me, who did not have access to a venue. Please, if my perception is wrong, clarify it for me.

3. Amy posted a thread where previous discussion about this was completely shut down in quite a condescending matter. It's not a priority, we were told.

4. It's difficult to make recommendations to a system we do not fully understand.

5. The priority system you just posted implies a poet from LA who competes in their local qualifiers and loses is given priority over say, a poet in Iowa city without access. Which then basically implies that the selection process is completely random, because the only thing that matters is your distance from Cleveland. Then if THATs the case, I'd love to hear why 2 Seattle poets were chosen over 2 Illinois poets for a slam in California. (Must be my geographic perception?)

plunderphonics

  • Sonnet
  • ***
  • Posts: 126
    • View Profile
Re: IWPS 2011 Questions
« Reply #16 on: August 24, 2011, 07:42:36 PM »
I'm assuming all of the main events at IWPS will be alcohol free.  Not that I drink, but, just curious.

HoustonRH7

  • Slammasters
  • Sonnet
  • ***
  • Posts: 337
    • View Profile
Re: IWPS 2011 Questions
« Reply #17 on: August 24, 2011, 09:17:58 PM »
Quote from: inkera link=topic=6936. msg71277#msg71277 date=1314216887
Storm poets are prioritized in this manner:
Out of the  country
Distance from host city
Access to local slam on a regular basis


Are all of these things given equal weight, or are they prioritized in this order? For instance, if there is a poet from Florida who lives in a city with a host venue, and a poet from the middle of nowhere Ohio, both trying to storm this year, would the Florida person be given priority since "distance from host city" is the criteria you listed first?

DGarity

  • Limerick
  • **
  • Posts: 88
    • View Profile
Re: IWPS 2011 Questions
« Reply #18 on: August 24, 2011, 10:14:00 PM »
It would be really nice to get a straightforward answer on these things. Also, the registration periods discussed so far have not made sense in context with the current time frame before IWPS. Forty five days from August 31 is still past the end of IWPS.

It appears to me that there is only one question people are really asking: What, in order, are the factors considered to determine which storm poets get priority?

Can someone with definitive knowledge on the question please lay that out for us?

inkera

  • Executive Council
  • Epic
  • *****
  • Posts: 7026
    • View Profile
    • Slamcharlotte
Re: IWPS 2011 Questions
« Reply #19 on: August 24, 2011, 10:49:27 PM »
Quote from: inkera link=topic=6936. msg71277#msg71277 date=1314216887
Storm poets are prioritized in this manner:
Out of the  country
Distance from host city
Access to local slam on a regular basis


Are all of these things given equal weight, or are they prioritized in this order? For instance, if there is a poet from Florida who lives in a city with a host venue, and a poet from the middle of nowhere Ohio, both trying to storm this year, would the Florida person be given priority since "distance from host city" is the criteria you listed first?

These are listed in order of priority. Based on the list, the poet from Florida would get in first.
I love me MORE.......the campaign

inkera

  • Executive Council
  • Epic
  • *****
  • Posts: 7026
    • View Profile
    • Slamcharlotte
Re: IWPS 2011 Questions
« Reply #20 on: August 24, 2011, 10:52:34 PM »
It would be really nice to get a straightforward answer on these things. Also, the registration periods discussed so far have not made sense in context with the current time frame before IWPS. Forty five days from August 31 is still past the end of IWPS.

It appears to me that there is only one question people are really asking: What, in order, are the factors considered to determine which storm poets get priority?

Can someone with definitive knowledge on the question please lay that out for us?

I will have a definite date for you tomorrow.
I love me MORE.......the campaign

Detroitphoenix

  • Epic
  • *****
  • Posts: 3846
  • The biggest boss that you've seen thus far.
    • View Profile
    • http://www.facebook.com/lashaunphoenixmoore
Re: IWPS 2011 Questions
« Reply #21 on: August 24, 2011, 11:31:04 PM »
I'm assuming all of the main events at IWPS will be alcohol free.  Not that I drink, but, just curious.

iWPS will be housed at Cleveland State University.  All of the venues are alcohol free for prelims and finals.  The night events will have alcohol.
"Some people would rather lose their lives than lose freedom." ~Black Thought - The ROOTS

randomcelestial

  • Rules Rewrite Committee
  • Sonnet
  • ***
  • Posts: 145
    • View Profile
Re: IWPS 2011 Questions
« Reply #22 on: August 25, 2011, 08:07:28 AM »
So basically, if you live in the states, lack of access to a normal slam is almost irrelevant.

This rule encourages poets to sign up for storm, slam for their qualifier spot, and then withdraw their storm bid if they win. Because that's exactly what people have done / will do. That defeats the entire purpose of having storm slots in the first place.

Inkera, can you please explain what is the spirit behind storm poet slots? Wasn't it restricted only to poets without access to a slam at NPS? Why has this been completely thrown out for another tournament?

Also, if distance from the slam is the the only effective criteria, then what's the difference between that and random draw?

AmyD

  • Ballad
  • ****
  • Posts: 920
    • View Profile
Re: IWPS 2011 Questions
« Reply #23 on: August 25, 2011, 08:22:37 AM »
So basically, if you live in the states, lack of access to a normal slam is almost irrelevant.

This rule encourages poets to sign up for storm, slam for their qualifier spot, and then withdraw their storm bid if they win. Because that's exactly what people have done / will do. That defeats the entire purpose of having storm slots in the first place.

Inkera, can you please explain what is the spirit behind storm poet slots? Wasn't it restricted only to poets without access to a slam at NPS? Why has this been completely thrown out for another tournament?

Also, if distance from the slam is the the only effective criteria, then what's the difference between that and random draw?

Even better, the system effectively punishes scenes for hosting the event, and cuts down on the number of competitors who will bring their own audience.

Syd Malicious

  • Sonnet
  • ***
  • Posts: 247
    • View Profile
Re: IWPS 2011 Questions
« Reply #24 on: August 26, 2011, 01:24:04 AM »
Men are from Mars, Women are from Venus. This system is sexist.

Faylita Hicks

  • Limerick
  • **
  • Posts: 40
    • View Profile
Re: IWPS 2011 Questions
« Reply #25 on: August 28, 2011, 12:13:47 PM »
Hey guys,

So I think the main issues that are needing to be addressed here is

1. The registration timeline - If I am correct, in the slam fam meeting at NPS we briefly discussed some issues concerning moving to a new bank that would allow us to register people from outside the US and so on.  (If this is incorrect, please feel free to set me straight.) 

As well as the personal crisis in the leadership concerning natural disasters and so on, I think it is safe to assume that a number of things that would normally be on schedule are off schedule.  Perhaps there should be a statement made with the opening of registration to clarify the issues that led to the late registration start for IWPS and other delays.  An official press release. Not enough people visit these forums to know what is happening and why things are they way they are. 

I think it's important that communication stays open on both sides and that the wonderful poets keep in mind that a number of these people are working hard, sometimes in their free time as general volunteers to bring us these events we covet.

2. The issue of the storm poet-  If the slam poet's plan for world domination continues to be successful and witness the exponential growth that it has in the last few years, then we can safely assume that the current format for IWPS competitor selection and the current format of IWPS will indeed need a change. 

I have personally never been to IWPS but have participated in several WOWPS events and again will make the assumption they are similar in design and execution.  Every year, there are thousands of slam poets all around the country who want to participate in these national events and more than a few of them end up on the sidelines instead of the big show because there are not:
a) Enough slots
b) Enough advertising for open registration dates
c) Funding grants for traveling artists attending these events

From what I know of the events, the format and registration has been moderately successful in previous years.  While it did not always please everyone, it worked in at least the most basic of ways.  I agree with the some of the previous posts that the current "lottery" pick for storm poets is not the most effective.  I also agree with some of the previous posts that the best thing to do is not complain about the system but find a solution and present this solution. 

There are a number of committees running around I think that are hoping to find a way to build our community better, why not start a committee for the growth and design of the national events.  The committee could use data from our previous events and feedback from the community to determine what changes in the current formats should be made to accommodate the growth.  As well, it could help with the spreading of information to make sure everyone is on the same page about the national events. 

I am sure someone somewhere has already said these things and suggested these ideas but it does not hurt to put them here.  I think we as an organization and as a community are experiencing something wonderful, growth.  And it sucks because it hurts so much.  I imagine things will take a while to adjust to the amount of interest we have been receiving but don't worry,  I think  we can handle it. 

Feedback anyone?

Scott Woods

  • Epic
  • *****
  • Posts: 10977
    • View Profile
    • http://www.scottwoodswrites.net
Re: IWPS 2011 Questions
« Reply #26 on: August 28, 2011, 12:23:44 PM »

There are a number of committees running around I think that are hoping to find a way to build our community better, why not start a committee for the growth and design of the national events.  The committee could use data from our previous events and feedback from the community to determine what changes in the current formats should be made to accommodate the growth.  As well, it could help with the spreading of information to make sure everyone is on the same page about the national events. 


You already have this committee; it's the EC.

Faylita Hicks

  • Limerick
  • **
  • Posts: 40
    • View Profile
Re: IWPS 2011 Questions
« Reply #27 on: August 28, 2011, 12:39:50 PM »
@Scott, lol. 

I realize that the EC is the tippy top and that they are the ones who have the most in depth look at what's happening and know what could be done to make these events more accessible and functional in format.  What I am suggesting is an allocation of responsibilities.  The EC already has a number of things to do, having a separate committee whose only responsibility would be to review the information and come up with a plan to offer to the EC for voting would help to streamline the process I think. 

If there were a number of committees to work on different, specified areas that would free up some of the time for the EC to work on whatever it is they feel the need to focus on as our established leadership.  (I really don't know what all the EC does, but it looks like a lot.)  Something like a format planning committee would focus on just that.  They would come up with several ideas, work out the details and offer up some options to the EC. 


randomcelestial

  • Rules Rewrite Committee
  • Sonnet
  • ***
  • Posts: 145
    • View Profile
Re: IWPS 2011 Questions
« Reply #28 on: August 28, 2011, 01:15:44 PM »
Easiest proposal ever:

Prioritize storm poets by 1) international representation, 2) former indie champions (which was the case before, but I've seen no mention of it here), 3) invited legacy poets (if WoWPS still does that, but I don't think they do?), 4) poets without legitimate access to their local qualifiers, 5) the general public, first come first served.

#2 and #3 might have been dropped over the years, and #4 can be sub-categorized into minor priorities (distance from nearest slam, history of volunteering, etc.) and clarified. For example, legitimate access rule should include "did not compete in the final for an iWPS spot at any venue." In my mind, that's the most egregious, exploitable loophole in the system.

amcehn

  • Epic
  • *****
  • Posts: 3201
    • View Profile
Re: IWPS 2011 Questions
« Reply #29 on: August 29, 2011, 08:46:20 AM »
Easiest proposal ever:

Prioritize storm poets by 1) international representation, 2) former indie champions (which was the case before, but I've seen no mention of it here), 3) invited legacy poets (if WoWPS still does that, but I don't think they do?), 4) poets without legitimate access to their local qualifiers, 5) the general public, first come first served.

#2 and #3 might have been dropped over the years, and #4 can be sub-categorized into minor priorities (distance from nearest slam, history of volunteering, etc.) and clarified. For example, legitimate access rule should include "did not compete in the final for an iWPS spot at any venue." In my mind, that's the most egregious, exploitable loophole in the system.

Here's the deal. We let folks in like this: Former Champs, International Reps, Poets without Access to Slams, Other poets.

Now, a bit of a scolding to you all. Inkera busted her butt to get you answers and you gave her a hard time. You all had notice that the Minot office (meaning your official answers to questions like these) was closed until today because my new office didn't have internet.

You will see, that the FB page (Poetry Slam, Inc.) has status updates on dates and things. You will see that the forms has information like this. The iWPS website should also have the information, but I don't control that website. We can get it up there though.

You will have information posted in the forums today, (with dates) and on the PSi FB page about iWPS. I don't control the iWPS FB page either, perhaps that person will copy and paste the information.

Relax a little bit. Some times you just have to wait for answers, no need to be pushy towards those going to bat for you.

Abigail Ehn, Executive Director, PSi
115-1 Rock Ridge Cir
MAFB, ND 58704
(701) 727-6324
psimember@charter.net