Did something go wrong with my contest?
Wednesday, December 5th, 2007
Only in the blogosphere would one manage to hold a contest giving away free money ($50.00) and then have a few people decide to attempt a virtual crucifixtion. Since a few of the entrants seem to be distraught over the contest that I help I’ve decided it is time to clear a few things up.
- Zybron had the following to say:
- In his article entitled How not to hold a blog contest he wrote -
Here is the first lesson when running a blog contest: pick a random winner. If that is not the way you wish to hold the contest, then be very clear exactly how you will pick the winner…up front. Had I known that the intent was to come up with the most original way of spending $50 on my blog I certainly would have composed a different post for the contest.
Fair enough. Except for the fact that in the post announcing the contest I stated the following (2nd version of the published paragraph):
How would you spend $50.00 on your blog? One lucky and creative winner will get a check for $50.00 from me in order to spend on their blog however they wish. In order to enter just this article. On December 1st I will choose one winner from all entries based on creativity, originality, and likelihood of success. Any takers?
I’ve added the underline emphasis for the purpose of this article. The text was only changed once in order to further clarify. You can see the original version of the above paragraph in Rotus’s entry. No matter which version you read you can’t help but come to the following conclusions-
- The prize is $50.00
- The winner will be choosen on December 1st (it ended up being December 5th)
- The selection will be based on creativity, originality, and likelihood of success
I think that pretty well addresses Zybron’s contention that I wasn’t clear how I’d pick the winner “up front”. If you didn’t know the intent was to come up with the most original way of spending $50.00 on your blog you didn’t read the instructions. It is as simple as that. You did exactly what the rest of us do 99% of the time. Saw the prize, saw how to enter, and went to town ignoring the details. And Rotus’s post confirms that what I was looking for and how the winner would be choosen was right there, in the details.
As for you contention that the winner should be random I’m not sure how I could both pick a random winner AND pick a winner based on the stated criteria of the contest (creativity, originality, and likelihood of success).
Your second “lesson” has already been addressed. From the time I published the contest I stated I was after creativity and originality. It wasn’t added in later. People aren’t upset about that suddenly being thrown in there. Because it wasn’t. People are upset because in my post announcing the winner I took the time and was graceful enough to tell a few people why they hadn’t won. People are upset because I didn’t write a post graciously thanking everyone for entering. A few people I commented directly in their entry post my thanks, several who didn’t enter properly I took the time to email and advise them of the proper way to enter.
All that said I have to agree. My post announcing the winner should have been a thank you for entering post. Because apparently it would have saved me the time of needing to write this rebuttal article? Myself I’d just want to know if I did or did not win and why or why not. I’m coming to the realization that is not the case for many people.
- Brent had the following to say:
- Brent’s comments were left in the “Winner” post. First he said:
Actually that would be a reverse pyramid scheme. Since I would be losing out on it. But I digress.
And that was a bit offensive buddy not much of a critique. Probably should be a bit nicer to people supporting your contests. Maybe a thanks for input? Just a thought.
He was responding to my comment as to why I hadn’t choosen his post. Lacking in originality and I’m not a fan of pyramid “schemes†lol. Clearly I was joking about it being a pyramid scheme. Else I wouldn’t have thrown in the “lol”. We carried on a few times in the comments but essentially it came down to this. Brent believed I owed a “better” critique of his entry (and others I would guess). I never said I would critique the entries. Nor did I make any attempt to do so. I simply gave a bottom line reason and moved along.
- Beth had the following to say:
- Once again in the comments -
I agree with Brent. How is buying crap from ThinkGeek original? That’s basically what the person who won said he would do, and uh, last I checked, uploading videos on YouTube was free, (and he’s using all of the “crap†from ThinkGeek to “enhance†his blog, yeah ok). A bit offensive? Really offensive. We took the time to write a post giving you a backlinks and you 1. don’t thank us and 2. Insult those of us who entered. Besides, I at least would have used the money for a header/logo for my blog, not on crap and would have been thankful for it.
How exactly does one address that obvious bitterness? She’s attacking my decision of who the winner was and worse yet she’s attacking the winner and calling his ideas “crap”. Ok that’s her business I suppose, but I think this demonstrates perfectly how sore people can be when they lose. She also neglected to notice that I reciprocated the backlinks and promoted her/their blog(s) as well. It wasn’t a one way street. Furthermore if you read her first comment in her entry post you’ll notice it was me thanking her for entering. Further you’ll notice that she was thanking me for the compliment. Which to me means she noticed and acknowledged my thanks. For those who don’t quite believe it…
I hope this clears up some questions that people seem to have. Bottom line I should have handled the winner announcment with “kid gloves” and I’m the first to admit I never would have dreamed that anyone would be offended by having the reasons they didn’t win pointed out. If anything I thought I was being helpful. For that mistake I apologize.
To answer the question I asked at the very beginning I have to say yes. Yes something went wrong with my contest. That being I failed to take into account human emotions. I’d love to hear your take on this good, bad, or indifferent!