following on from comment on poem of the month this month - i thought i'd be brave and request some discussion from WOL members regarding their views on what makes for a poem to be considered for posting as 'poem of the month'?

I think it needs to have good page structure because even good performance poetry needs that or it is just rambling. As we are presenting in the written form, ideally it should be something that would work as page and performance (although I feel that we can't make a judgement on performance standards by just reading it). Good grammar, format and an innovative style, relevant and interesting subject, universal (as in able to connect with a wide audience), ....main ingredients anyway.

However, poetry is very subjective and I don't think it should be chosen by the last winning poet of the month !

If you disagree with me just read my article that will be appearing soon and you may understand where I'm coming from.

I think it took a lot of guts for Darren to say what he did and good on him for that and I hope it will promote a vigorous and thoughtful discussion.

I'm particularly interested in how you think we should change the way in which Poem of the Month is chosen.

At the moment the last winner of "poem of the month" picks the next one and anyone who has won the competition before is not eligible to be chosen again (otherwise I'd win every month obviously).

This may seem to be (and is) simple but still takes a bit of organising especially as we give the winner a bit of time to get an audio version of the poem together.

So in your response what I don't want to hear is "You should..." but rather tell us what the criteria should be and what you are prepared to commit to e.g. "I'm prepared to be on a panel to chose the potm" or "I'm prepared to organise and run potm".

Write Out Loud's 'Poem of the Month' (POTM) must surely have been borne from the original site's format. What can we have to fill the page?' Make it interesting? That sort of thing. Previous 'winners' are made up of the whole trilogy of WOL's founder members! And while I have no doubt that this was done in the right spirit, things concerning this site, and its related events, have moved along much quicker than the concept of POTM.
Most types of competition, and let's face it - we should all be aware it's a competitive world out there, have a criteria. Usually a minimum standard. This shouldn't exclude people because their English isn't too good. Those who struggle with their English should simply seek sound advice - it's all about learning.
This is not about 'winning' or 'losing' - it's about the quality of poems that reflect this site and its patrons. Poetry is very subjective, yes. Opinionated? Yes, to that as well - but one person's opinion for the Kudos of WOL POTM? Come on...
Promote POTM to the level that it deserves. Some of the previous poems that have been awarded the title are more than suitable - others, I don't think, are. That's my opinion.
Having a panel of people prepared to judge submitted poems does consume time and involves some effort. Most things that are worth doing usually do. Personally, I think that the POTM should be selected from poems submitted for consideration throughout the month. Poems can be handed to events organisers at the WOL events or they could be emailed to an appropriate address. There must be a better way than the current format?
I would be willing to help in any way I can.

I want a vote on how the vote is conducted to elect the panel.

The POTM is not a 'good' poem, 'best' poem or whatever. It is a choice of a poem to be a focus of the WoL site for a month. All opinion about poetry is subjective. It may be possible to get a fair degree of agreement about a piece being trite and worthless, but beyond that one person's masterpiece will be another person's crap.

This being the case, it is as good to give the choice to the last selected author as to give it to anybody else or a committee. It is a good rule to exclude Paul Blackburn from being selected every month, but I would not want to see many more rules or any sort of bureaucracy growing up around it.

Why not have Darren Thomas pick the next POTM on account of his immense sagacity and then revert to the present system except that once a year the person to pick the POTM should be chosen at random from WoL poets.

Of course we would need a committee to decide on the method of random selection. I would like a vote on how we set up the committee.

I suppose that's unanimous then.

A panel could work, what we have say 10 panelists changing every now and again, roll on roll off?

how many on Darren and Nabilya on the panel is a good idea, a good starting point

There aren't that many people who offer a full critique service like they do.

Its really difficult situation this.

How did the discussion start? Has poem of the month alway's been controversial and it has been sleeping in our thoughts a while?

Why have a poem of the month?

What does it mean?

Why and what are we

When will the aliens arrive.

I read one of Darren Thomas 's poems recently, and I think that they will arrive in one of his cardboard spaceships.

Just seen your comment Sophie. Hello, by the way.

No, it's bloody well not!
Yes, poetry is subjective. Yes, somebody's poem will always touch 'something' in somebody else. It may reflect that person's current mental state. Touch their 'nob' of sympathy. Turn their 'empathy' dial. Mine into that seem of meloncholy that comes with the credit card bills - but it's not the basis for awarding a non-existing trophy to a person for writing a poem that swims in the accolade of POTM.

Maybe it's me? There are other sites out there that receive poems to be judged. What's their format for deciding? One person? Five hairy men? A dozen WI ladies? I dunno.
Having a single person making a decision as big as this, well, just seems... too narrow.
But hey, I have to go - I have other people to upset and slap around the chops...

Whilst I agree, to some extent, with Darren's point - I have to say that I agree more with Sophie.
At the risk of sounding unoriginal - poetry is a matter of taste and, I think, if you were trying to choose POTM by committee it might well end up as Poem of theYear.
As I would expect most people on here do - I read a lot of poetry by many different authors with wildly varying styles, I couldn't say which is my favourite poem, I'd have a hard time saying which are the best poets. To get a concensus of opinion about something so subjective would, I think, be quite chaotic.... just look at what's become of The Turner Prize!
I agree with Darren's points about typos, spelling mistakes etc., and also that there are better poems out there. But it was Sean's choice and I still think, with its message of new beginnings, was a good choice for a new year.
I think, on reflection, I like the fact that this month's winner is chosen by the previous winner - it's a bit of a privilege for the chooser, and for the chosen it is proof positive that your work has had an impact on somebody else; and its becoming a mutual back-slapping exercise is prevented by not being eligible twice.
And finally, I would like to say that if a POTM committee is appointed I do not feel that I am, in any way, qualified to be on it, nor do I have that much time to spare.
Cx

Pete Crompton is my favourite alien.

Balls. Bananas. Brown Bread.

The previous winner can pick the new month's winner? Yeah, let's leave it at that...

Touched it Sophie - nowt's 'appened...








BOOM...

Workshops are a good idea.

Don't be upset Darren - this is an excellent discussion thread - but maybe if there is no concensus of opinion in this 'thread' it illustrates that concensus of opinion on something as subjective as poetry would be hard to reach?

Personally - I am not pro increasing bureaucracy in any forum. And, as sometimes with politicians, I think that very often the people who are on the committees are the very people that shouldn't be.

I admire the way that you put yourself on the line, say what you think, and say it well, but on this occasion I disagree - at least with the choice by committee idea. Wasn't your original post just to think about alternative methods?


Cx

I'm not upset. And yes, my original thread was to 'discuss' what suitable alternative there could be to POTM. If it ain't broke...etc. I don't think it's broke per se - but the wheels of POTM need a good oiling. Like we all do - from time to time.

A camel they say is the direct result of a commitee designing a horse.

Come on ....do we really want this sort of politic and structure... POM is Good bad and the ugly... bit like the chrismas cracker riddle....a bit of fun.

What about this weeks top ten...X Factor
Brit award......Oscar....big bun fight black tie once a year!.....or shall we just let it be...

Sod it! I need more Night nurse...
Nurse?

I feel we are getting too padantic about POTM. The alternative will no doubt cause just as much unrest. I vote we leave it as a personal choice, warts and all.

I don't want this to sound like I don't respect Sean's decision and choice of POTM - or any of the previous 'winners' and their 'choosers', come to that.

Accepting one person's choice of poem, disappointingly 'warts and all' - and with an accompanied blurb as to WHY they have chosen it, just seems lacking.

And Phil, this is not a dig at your work. Personally, I feel that you've written much better work that has gone unnoticed.

If you would care to poke me in the eye, I will be at Wigan's Tudor House tomorrow night.

OK this thread is going to go on I can tell besides which my Night Nurse has finally been emptied every drop; the opiates have run their course.

Whilst I appreciate that all poetry is subjective I am at a loss to understand the inability to criticise. By that I mean, if instead of a poet PG had chosen to be a Standup Comic and didn’t get many laughs he wouldn’t get many gigs. The reason being that the simple contract twixt audience and comic is immediately broken and the punishment is dire, he dies on stage.

Similarly we poets stand up, we stand up in our thousands throwing caution to the wind clamoring for our poems to be heard. We then almost without exception go on to under perform and exceed the time allowance we have been given. We return to our seat midst whistles, flashing camera and yelps of appreciation and bonne amitié.
.
The performance is rarely good, the poems often mediocre and yet the poet is always both applauded on and off the stage. They have been applauded with such joyous and blessed good cheer, that a stranger among us might think that this had been a golden moment and a truly rare performance.

What hypocrites we all are, instead of being non judgmental perhaps we should be less mealy mouthed and judge ourselves by a panel chosen at random from the audience. When all the cards are raised the poet vacates the stage, or kinder they fail to achieve a score to enable them to proceed. In the event that the better poets and performers have made it through to the second round good judgment will yield up a poem/performer of the night.

Similarly POM can be judged, a number out of ten can affixed to a poem within that current months contribution, no poet can vote for himself no poet can vote twice. If we feel that massive vote rigging can take place then appoint a panel.

If the administration at WOL wish to appoint a panel of external ‘Published’ poet/ performers that would be even better.

Is there some kind of monetary prize for POTM?
as well as the accolade? which i suppose makes it more appealing. I'm asking because i don't know!

I agree that Darren was very brave with his comment and it's written in such a way that i doubt anyone could be upset by it, let alone Phil. It is a fair contribution.

How about some kind of system whereby people reading the poetry blogs and profiles can select what they consider to be a worthwhile poem for POTM and vote on it?
Perhaps a 'committee' or chosen 'panel' could choose a poem they think is worthy as it is posted and include it in a designated section for everyone else to vote on. The most votes wins the accolade.
Perhaps taking into consideration that the previous months winners poems are not included in the next months.


That's my input over and done with.
Janet.x

In reply to Gus's point, I have thought that very thing for years (which is why I like the audience at Wigan so much - if your show's crap, they'll talk over you, which is how it should be).

To a similar end, I have posted a discussion post called "Write Club" (the rules of write club are in the first comment box at the bottom of the thread) in the poetry critique section. If you wish to have it confirmed that a poem you have written is the best poem ever written, Write Club offers the only online forum in which that won't necessarily happen, and where you'll get an honest (and hopefully balanced) opinion on it, and be told to shut up and just wear it rather than arguing the toss.

If I had the heaven's embroidered cloths... I wouldn't wipe my fat arse on them. And as to treading carefully, because we're treading on your dreams - not a chance at Write Club, but we will replace any that we break with cold hard realities.

DG - didn't know had that facility - thanks

I don't have any special website powers with this login account - it's in discussions and it's just a thread at the moment, like this one.

Well, this has stired up a healthy discussion hasn't it!

To echo what Julian said I would rather be judged as a writer/poet rather that having Parkinson's sufferer tagged on the end like its some sort of filter to protect me from constructive critisism.

With regard to 'Richer Tomorrow' I don't expect everybody to like that or anybody to like my work. It would not be a normal world if everybody did. The same goes for every poet on this or any other site etc. Every time I have performed this POM on stage it has prevoked a strong emotional resonce but could, I agree, benefit from typo removal.

Some of the poems I have read here and heard at gigs, yes including yours Darren, I have thought thats not what I call peotry. Having said that Darren, you have passed on good advice, which has helped me before.

A proportion of writers on WOL have not had the benefit of 'Creative Writing' degrees and learn their craft from the University of Poetry. Sites like WOL have helped me alot as have fellow poets. So that throughs up another discussion point. What is the point of the 'Blogg' comment box? I thank everybody who has thought my work worthy of praise, but should the comment box be spilt in two. The first section might ask, What did you enjoy about this poem? The second might ask, What advice, if any, could you give that could help improve this poem? That thought I will put to the committee.

I am off to pick up my son from school now. Then rehearsing the show I have written called Emotional Rainbows, part of the Not Part Of NYE fesitival on the 17th. Sorry I can't get there tonight. I am waiting for my driving licence to be renewed, so for now Darren you arae safe. LOL. another typo!

Nabila asks an interesting question which I find difficult to answer with regard to the web site and particularly POTM.

REAL WORLD

Our core activity in the real world (as oppose to the virtual world of the web) is to take poetry out into the community and encourage ordinary people to share their poetry with others by, amongst other things, participating in our events.

We are non-judgemental and are supportive of what anyone attempts with his or her poetry although we draw the line at racism and sexism which will not be tolerated.

We have no agenda to “improve” or change the people who engage with us. We hope people’s writing/performance will improve through exposure to more experienced and (maybe) better read poets, but regard any improvement as a bonus.

Similarly, although some people get involved with writing groups, other performance poetry groups and the Arts in general we regard this as incidental, if beneficial, and not part of our core activity.

We do other things as well as our core activity but let’s leave it at that for now.

WEB SITE

The role of the web site is less clearly defined. It originated as the “club” notice board for our real world activity but has grown into something else.

Our underlying ethos though, I suppose, remains the same i.e. helping individuals and organisations by providing an online platform and resource centre to meet their requirements.

However, all is not so simple.

It seems to me that the web site has several strands that may or may not appeal to everyone:

· National Information Centre – Gig guide, news items
· Club – this is the stuff that relates to Write Out Loud groups only
· Features – editorially controlled content: reviews, widtn, potm etc
· User generated content – Poets’ Showcase, Blogs
· Social Networking/Interactivity – Comments, Discussions & Chat

There is a tension between using the site as a club type bulletin board and being a national resource and another tension between social networking and the “serious” members.

POEM OF THE MONTH

Poem of the Month (potm) began by being, and hopefully still is, a bit of fun.

There is no prize associated with winning the competition and a poet can only win it once.

As you can see from the comments above, many of us involved in running Write Out Loud want to be inclusive so in some ways competition to some of us is anathema. We have had great internal debates on whether to host Slams for instance. On the other hand, highlighting something that you have appreciated and think others may have missed would seem, at least to me, to be a reasonable endeavour and that’s the (misguided?) way I view potm.

When we started potm off, the committee chose poems that they thought merited it, in some way or other, but without any serious discussion or navel gazing.

People complained that we were making our own arbitrary choices, as any panel would, and we decided that, as temporary expedient, we would let the last winner chose the next potm and this process has stuck.

Over the years the competition has thrown up many quirky and very individualistic choices and I think this is one of its strengths. Certain poems have been chosen that simply wouldn’t have stood a chance in most other competitions and I know that winning it has brought joy into particular peoples lives.

But, of course, a strength is also a weakness and I have to admit that I wouldn’t have chosen some of the poems and I’m sure the same is true for you too. But hey! When are all the people going to agree on anything?

A point has been made that potm is effectively a shop window for Write Out Loud and the poets/poetry therein. That may or may not be the case – who can tell?

What one person considers a “bad” poem might put off one person from being involved in the site but encourage another.

I’d like to hear from some of the newcomers – did potm influence your involvement in the site?

As to a some kind of “person of note” viewing the site, judging us on potm and finding us wanting – well let them.

At the moment, there’s nothing in this thread suggesting we should change the way potm is chosen, but we’re always open to constructive suggestions especially when they are accompanied by plans of how you would implement it.

One thing we’re not short of at Write Out Loud is a plethora of ideas. But it’s too easy to say “Why don’t you do…” much harder to say “This is (with your help) what I want to do…”

Remember, whatever way we choose potm there will still be criticism.

Hope this helps.

I’m off back to my sick bed

Paul

Speaking as a newcomer I can tell you that POTM didn't particularly influence my decision to join. Like many others seem to have done, I visited the site for quite a long while before I actually worked up courage to join.
What persuaded me to join? - the sheer diversity of work on here, the fact that opinions are freely, and frequently intelligently, given, and that it seemed like a thriving and fairly friendly community. There seemed to be so much going on, albeit not locally for me.
Also - I wanted, still want, feedback. I want to improve, I want to produce work that people want to listen to or identify with. And within that is included feedback on grammar, spelling, subeject matter - the whole kit n' caboodle. That's what I thought I might get from joining WOL.
Similarly, what stopped me from joining for so long was that I felt a little intimidated by some of the more obviously erudite members. And for that reason I'm still some way off having the confidence to submit anything to the scrutiny of 'Write Club' - but I'm getting there.
Anyway - just my opinion but no, POTM didn't influence my joining.
Cx

Hi Phil - glad you responded.

I’m going to push that word ‘subjective’ once more into the frame.
Poetry IS subjective. I don’t expect everybody, or anybody for that matter, to pour honey all over my writing and hum contentment with each spoon-fed mouthful.
Each and every one of us has a particular style that we cultivate and develop with the help of what we learn and what we experience. I too am bereft of a ‘Creative Writing’ degree but I do possess, or so it seems, to my absolute detriment, some learned advice that I have gleaned from colleges and other less salubrious establishments and tutors alike, some knowledge about the English language and a little about writing creatively. Personally, I think that if you take just one thing away from these writing courses then they help (obviously) but they can corrupt those far too infrequent ’party popper’ thoughts that we have on occasions, which can eventually appear onto paper and are then displayed into the world of subjective opinion.
Some people enjoy what I write while others think that it’s pure faecal fodder.
Do I care? Well - I suppose I’d be telling a lie if I said, ‘no’. Although to be perfectly honest, I think that we all need to hear opinion - no matter if it’s to the detriment of our writing egos. As long as people try to explain just ‘why’ they find it lacking. That way we can begin to learn. We can then choose to do with that advice or opinion as we please. Oscar Wilde left us with some great quotes about ‘advice’ - take your pick.
A fine piece of advice I was proffered many years ago was attributed to a highly successful businessman. He was asked, ‘how do you become a success?’
He replied , ’I have no idea - but I do know how to fail. Try pleasing everybody all the time’.
This is a play on that other similar idiom but it resonated with me.
Me - you - anybody, we’re never going to ’please’ everybody, and to think that we can would be more than foolish. It’s how we deal with this that SHOULD make - or at the very least - be the difference.
Your reply couldn’t resist saying something that was negative about my work. I would have been highly surprised if it hadn’t…

Good luck with all your writing endeavours but especially with ‘Emotional Rainbows’ - I’ll hopefully see it perfomed at the forthcoming ‘Not NYE…’

Take Care

I keep coming back to this thread as I'm sorry it seems to have expired. I don't see anything wrong with having a POTM - but what's its function? Should poetry be competitive? I guess slams are - never having attended one. Is it something - as previous contributors have alluded to - that might attract others to this site? Is it a mark of appreciation by fellow poets - a sort of medal?

To be frank, I don't think that the present system works. Looking back over past POTM's there seems to be many by poets who, apart from their own work, contribute very little to the site; no feedback, no crits, no participation in discussions. If the POTM is chosen by succession, then isn't there a danger of getting stuck in a rut? i.e. the subjective view of one individual that recreates itself in that one style is preferable to another?

I think we need a definition of what a POTM ought to be. POTM suggests to me that whatever is chosen should be chosen by common critical acclaim, rather than the view of an individual. Individual views can be expressed as they are now - in feedback on profiles and blog entries.

I'm not a techie-whizzkid, but have seen on another site what I would imagine to be a relatively feasible method of choosing a POTM.

If you will allow me to expand:

At a certain point, say (logically) the end of each month, anyone can nominate a poem as a POTM. These nominations ought to be accompanied by a small address as to why this particular poem deserves to be nominated.

In my experience not many will wish to nominate, hopefully leaving a handful of of poems as contenders.

Everyone is then invited to "vote" on these nominations (a simple and anonymous tick-box exercise.) Not everyone will wish to, or be bothered to vote.

Both the former processes are, of course, time-limited. It may or may not be a good idea to make the voting process transparent as it happens, i.e. an ongoing "counter." When the vote ends, the author of the POTM is invited to say a little about the work - what was the inspiration, thought processes etc.

No system is going to be perfect, or to suit everyone, but at least this method, or something like it, is more democratic and representative of the tastes and opinions of site users. It should, therefore, follow that the POTM chosen in this way is more representative of what the site is about.

Or, am I way off base?

Regards,
A.E.

I'm in agreement that something needs to change - and yes a similar style of poetry seems to keep winning - presumably for all the reasons Anthony has gone in to.
When I suggested that a proper voting system should be put in place, I was told that this would open it up to people putting up multiple votes and voting for friends. That doesn't say much for us all - does it?

Hi Anthony, All.

I actually like the unpredictability of POTM when "low" profile members poems have been chosen. I would probably have not seen this work if it were not nominated.

Nor do I mind the subjectivity of the choice. Maybe it is taken too seriously, the debate will no doubt continue.

Winston

Well whatever becomes of POTM it's a feature of WOL and it's certainly succeeded in creating great discussion and debate recently as well as attracting comments since it was brought to the attention of some who might not have looked at it previously.
Anything which creates something has got to be worthwhile!
So i've altered my original thoughts on it and say leave it as it is for now. Change it when people lose interest. :-)

I've lost interest now Janet - that's the point. No point in me commenting on this month's poem which is just a slightly different version of a style that won last month and I have no interest in what wins next month because it will most likely be the same again. I have no control or input into what is chosen so just what is the point? Poem of the month is just a dead duck for me. There is a wealth of poetry on here that I really like though so I will continue to enjoy the site.

Isobel! you party pooper. lol win

I'm relatively new on the site, and I have no problem with one 'winner' selecting another. It works. I thought it was an innovative idea. Panels can be fractious and just as unfair as a one-person decision. No selected poet is ever going to make a bad choice of poem to represent his or her successor. You are judged by what you choose as much as by what you write. WOL can relax; its reputation will stay intact. While I would be honoured to be a choosee, I can't imagine being a chooser. What a responsibility!

I could handle it.

This month's poem is an excellent poem. The only problem I have with it is the poet. Someone who doesn't appear to post on WOL or interact at all with others. Could we please have a secondary 'amateur' poem of the month, so that at least those of us who actually read all those monthly postings, can get excited. Not a new idea, I know, but one that I won't stop promoting.

Isobel is right. A second award is needed - for unpublished poets who deserve more recognition. This is not to criticise this month's excellent poem. I would tentatively suggest that any new award should go to a blog made in the month - not something picked off the profile.
This is not self-serving as I've never written anything good enough to be a POM and probably never will. But there are poets here who deserve a shot at the escalator to stardom. I would give this month's to Anthony Emmerson's EDGE. Very dark, but brilliant

Edge

Gone is the mind where love and hope once played,
She feels the urge to paint a world with blood.
She watches moonlight dance along the blade.

She dreams a world of red in every shade,
Would banish all the rainbow if she could.
Gone is the mind where love and hope once played.

All trust now shredded, reason torn and frayed,
A hollow corpse where once a woman stood;
She watches moonlight dance along the blade.

A tortured love, deceased and now decayed;
From drop to river, now a salt-eyed flood.
Gone is the mind where love and hope once played.

All options spent, one judgement to be made
It matters not for evil, nor for good;
She watches moonlight dance along the blade.

A price to pay for selfless love betrayed,
No question in her conscience if she should.
Gone is the mind where love and hope once played,
She watches moonlight dance along the blade …

The quality of the poem was never at issue Steve - just the method of choosing and yes I have enjoyed very many of your poems over the last month.

I would agree with Dave that Anthony's Edge was indeed a top poem for the month, as was his Lifelines in a previous month. Let's big it up for those with real talent on here who also exist in a very real sense, commenting on others or making a contribution socially to the site - not that social contribution should be necessary to selection, I might add.

Hello there

Regarding Isobel's initial comment, I simply thought it would be interesting to select a POTM by someone that's not part of the WOL hardcore. Whenever this has occurred in the past, and has thrown up poets I'd not heard of before (Alex Smith and Jeremy Page are recent examples), I've always appreciated it.

If there is a wider issue here about certain poets 'paying their dues' by contributing to discussion threads, then perhaps the whole notion of eligibility for the Poets' Showcase needs to be revised - though surely such a move would raise serious questions about what WOL stands for.

Personally, I was just glad to be invited to select this month's POTM. I speak, incidentally, as someone who uses the WOL website at least once a day (on average), and has always enjoyed the warm welcome I've been accorded on the NW circuit.

All the best

R

I'm sure you do make a very valid contribution Russell. The issue here is that month after month poems get chosen that haven't appeared anywhere in blogs and which come from no-where or from profiles that appear from no-where. If we all wanted to appreciate the work of wider poets we could buy a book of it and read them to our hearts content or someone on high could choose a random poem for wider general appreciation that wasn't tied to any timescale or prestigious position. WOL isn't and should never be a closed shop, neither should POM...
Could I also add that my feelings have nothing to do with the North/South divide. It is perhaps 'co-incidental' that the last two poets have been from London. There are very many excellent contributors to this site who do not live in the North West.

Hi Isobel

Thanks for that. I'll have a think about what you've said. Maybe I need to look further into the more interactive aspects of this splendid site.

I'll just sign off by saying that, in selecting Richard Tyrone Jones's poem, I was simply responding to the selection criteria as I understood them to be, i.e: aside from limiting one's choice to poems appearing in poets' profiles (not blogs) and not selecting work by previous winners, one has a free hand. Mr Administrator!

And I certainly didn't mean to hint at a north-south divide. I just wanted to underline my high regard for WOL and those closely involved with it.

All the best (from sunny Deptford)

R

Thank you for that insight into how POM is chosen Russell. I had naively believed that last month's winner chose the poem. I also didn't realise that you were restricted to looking just at profiles. To me, that kind of restricts the POM to new joiners since very few poets regularly update their profiles with poetry, preferring to receive feedback by blogging instead.
I am thinking of running an amateur poem of the month (APOM)for all poets who blog in one particular period - perhaps one month might be a good timescale. People could vote for their chosen poem by emailing me before a certain date. I have discussed it with Paul and he is not averse to the idea. This will not undermine the big POM which we will all continue to enjoy. I will post further details once I have ironed them out. Whether the APOM will be successful depends on how people get behind the idea. If the current system is only bugging me, it could be a total flop LOL. x

Hi Isobel

Your APOM idea is a good one, so it’ll be interesting to see it up and running – though perhaps thinking of them as ‘amateur’ and ‘non amateur’ might ruffle a few feathers on both sides and confuse the selection criteria. Bloggers’ Poem Of The Month, perhaps? Or maybe the main POTM should simply be opened up to include recent blogs.

The choice is indeed in the hands of the previous winner (if that’s the right word), though as this was a serious discussion, I chose to contribute to it under my real name.

I suppose any system like this is going to sometimes throw up results that come across as random (another word I was hoping to avoid), but it seems to me that randomness is an occupational hazard of our particular artform. I’m sure we’ve all been to poetry slams where a bit of maverick voting has produced an unanticipated winner, for example.

Anyway, thanks again for your thoughts. I obviously hadn’t expected my selection to spark off a discussion, but if it results in something as positive as the APOM, then it’s all to the good.

Nice e-chatting to you.

R

Sorry Russell - I had no idea that you and Rachel were one and the same - this site is full of surprises. Yes someone else has pointed out that the term 'amateur' can be seen as derogatory. I was trying to be discreet and not go into head on confrontation with the official POM, which receives very prominent position on our home page.
Perhaps we should throw open what we call it to the site members - I'm sure we could find some funny abbreviations. I am not sure if it will actually come into affect. I detect a change in position from admin...
I do like the poem you chose and also thought yours was a very worthy poem. The good thing about the current poem of the month is that it introduces us to poets we wouldn't otherwise have heard or read.
The competition I am proposing to introduce will be more of a reward for poets that we do know and have read. The two schemes are therefore very different and each worthy in their own way.
Thank you Russell for engaging in this discussion and not feeling picked on - I really would not like anyone to feel that.

BooOOOOooo - HissssSSSSSsssssSSS - bOOOoooOOOoo.

I think, certainly over the last few years, that POTM has had its merits picked at - shot at - stamped on - rolled down hills - boiled in oil and generally been subjected to more opinion than any other 'link' in WOL.

Let's face it - winning POTM is a double-edged sausage. Rather like winning 'Employee of the Month'. It's a title that will endear you to some, while at the same time alienating you from others.

Having an 'Amateur Poem of the Month', I think, is superflous to what this site represents. By definition, nearly every member of this site is an amateur. And where would you stop?

How about an award for, say, 'the poem with the most personal insults thinly disguised as implicit language that reads as prose' award? I could make a suggestion for that category's winner.

Or an award for the poet with most sarcastic tone?

The hairiest bottom?

The least friends on Facebook?

The most chins?

The worst poem EVER posted on WOL?

The best sugar-coated comment?

The most Self-indulgent poet?

The wurst spelin? n gramr poem!

Yes, I would sweep the board in many of those categories, but hey. What does it matter? POTM is nailed on with 6" subjective nails.
For those who don't win yet would like to - either move to London or befriend this month's winner. Easy, init.


(8^}-)

You are such a bloody cynic Darren. You have had plenty of pops at POM in the past. Why can't you convert that energy into something positive? Or at least think about change? Are we all so apathetic that we think it is ok to just sit back and say - 'that's the way it's always been so leave it the same even though it suits few' , If everyone thought like that we'd still be living in caves and lighting our cigarettes with a piece of flint.

If you read back over the discourse of this thread, or any other thread that mentions POTM, I think you'll find that I was the first one to challenge the merits of POTM.

My opinion has not changed, but at the end of the day, not only does it go dark, there are far more important things to worry about. Like 'will I win the award for the site's biggest cynic?'

(8^{-)

You'd definitely win that one Darren. Not sure about the site's hairiest bottom - you'll have to let me take a look...
Being serious for one moment, have got the go ahead from Admin, so this will go ahead. I will be most disappointed if you don't cast a vote Darren. You will probably be relieved to hear that. as principal administrator, I am disbarring myself from the competition. Will this stop me from writing poetry with metres that don't meet with your approval? Not at all.

Yes, amatuer is a fuzzy term. Wasn't the idea to highlight the work of unpublished poets? It's tricky if someone is published but doesn't say so on their profile, as people shouldn't waste their votes. But most people who are published seem to say so and we don't want publication police, which would be another job for the new Assistant Admin, Isobel. I'd say keep it simple - let people vote for whoever they believe to be unpublished (so long as it's not themselves). If they get it wrong, it's just one of those things.

It's worth thinking about it at this stage and getting it right, because the end result should be recognition and encouragement for good stuff from non-prominent people

I don't really care whether people are published or non published. People who are published or think they are published, have often paid for the privilege. Some unpublished poets are every bit as good as published ones. The competition will be open to all people who blog within the month. I am happy to accept votes for poems on new profiles that have been posted in that same month also. Putting things into blogs often gets them noticed more though - I don't know how many people have time to trawl through everyone's profiles - I certainly don't. On that note - I really do need to get off this site and trot off to Wigan.
Darren, your very recent blog on POM is totally laugh out loud hilarious. I shall revisit it later tonight and comment. If there were a prize for the funniest 'prose' poet, I would award it to you. Let us never lose our sense of humour...

The problem i have with this idea is the possibility of even more blog inundations which has also been a considerable thread for discussion.
Another problem could be that whichever poem is voted as winner is open to a lot of critique which the poet may or may not welcome depending on their reasons for posting a poem.
I have to say i would be tempted to stay behind the scenes within the comfortable confines of my profile.
I'd hate to see potentially good poets leave the site due to being upset because of what they might consider to be negative feed-back. Some people simply aren't ready for it.
There's a good mix of people who give good advice and helpful feedback as well as people who just like to say when they appreciate a poems content on this site. Perhaps poets who post in blogs could let it be known their poems are open for being judged as worthy or not for entry into this new concept.

I with-hold judgement until it happens because i'd like to be wrong on this occasion. I'd like to think it will encourage poets to write more in the knowledge they can improve their technique as they go along with some help from the more learned on this website.

Hi Isobel

Sorry, I forget that not everyone knows about my dual identity (usually when I tell people, they say something like ‘I know it’s you, you fool’).

Glad you’ve got the go-ahead for the, erm, Alternative Poem Of The Month. Like you say, it’ll provide a good and necessary service. I’ll make sure I cast my vote.

No offence taken at all. Obviously I wanted to enter the discussion to ‘fight my corner’, as it were. I think what I admire most about WOL is that all the contributors care so deeply about poetry and are committed to debating its finer points – kind of refreshing in an age that sometimes feels woefully unartistic.

All the best

R

PS: Darren – Am more than happy to be floated along Ullswater on an inflatable banana. I’ve never been known to shy away from tacky forms of self-promotion, and don’t mean to start now. Conduct me to the landing-stage post-haste.

I don't anticipate the problems you foresee Janet. A poem written by the people, for the people and judged by those same people is less likely to be torn to shreds. Why would any of us want to do that? The choice of poem will still be subjective - many may not like it - but it will have been chosen in the most democratic way. Some poems just speak to us and whether they are 'perfect' stylistically or not is irrelevant to me. I will not be inviting poets to savage any winners and do not see this as a learning exercise for anyone. If people want critique they should put their poems up for it on the appropriate discussion thread. This competition is about awarding recognition for good poetry amongst our fellow poets. If anyone disagrees with the majority decision it is tough - they keep their opinions to themselves. I will post a blog about it soon - as soon as I've decided what to call it.
I'd just like to thank Russell again for his input into this and his amazing good humour. I feel quite guilty now that I ignored his Poem of the Month - it was good - I was just in a fit of pique cos I'd never heard of him!

hey, I came on this site so that I could just write again. Somebody fill me in ( nicely please ). My poetry is not for everyone because we all bring ourselves to a poem - and the heaps of life's baggage that trails behind us, so I supose that one person's potm may not be the same as the next person's potm. Without meaning to offend anyone does it really matter?

I am trying to read all the poetry on the site tonight - up late because my eldest son broke his arm, and in for op tomorrow. He writes, he won young writer of the year 2 years ago, he's a budding poet and very talented.- hmm maybe I should put his stuff up! lol - ( yes Isobel, I am now using it, as I know what it means ! haha)

Nicky - I also write for catharsis - very many poets do - whether they choose to write in first person or not. I try not to put ten tons of catharsis up, mind you, cos people lose patience - but the odd one here and there is quite normal and not something anyone should be made to feel ashamed of.
As I said before, I will not be inviting people to criticise the popular choice. I will just be posting that poem, together with the positive comments received on it. If anyone wants to stand down from that honour, they will have the option and poem number 2 will be given it instead.
Good to hear poetry runs in your family - it is such a joy to see traits run through. Hope his arm is ok. x

@ Paul - re newcomers being influenced to join by POTM.

+1 for me being influenced.

I was introduced to this site by Tony Walsh, and made a couple of page views. When I saw Elvis McGongal on the front page I paid more attention, as I know Elvis quite well, I was intrigued - Seeing Rachel then the following month reinforced my opinion of the site as being valued, and so I signed up. Then seeing another of my friends as POTM this month, made me post a couple of poems on the blog too.

I also cannot pass a slot machine without putting money in - thats how easily distracted I am.

Hi Isobel,
i realize my comment may have been a little negative but to pin-point the possible problems associated with something like your proposal is (i think) essential before setting out the rules.
It might not be up to you to decide whether or not a comment is removed, that would disgruntle people who have given what they perceive to be positive feed-back for a poem chosen to be in the ''spotlight'' for a month. I think i read that part right, where you say you will invite positive comments. It's an open forum which has a comment box for anyone to post on.
When you take into consideration the amount of publicity POTM has produced recently (not all good i might add), it would be nice to see positive comments all the time but we need to be realistic.

I really do wish you well with this project because it is obviously close to your heart and i know you are the kind of person who will put 200% of yourself into it to make it work.
I will certainly place my vote/s.

WOLOP (Write Out Loud Outstanding Poem) award is here. The explanation and rules of engagement are posted in the blog section.
Janet, I am grateful for your input into this discussion - it is necessary to consider all the pros and cons before embarking on anything new - then you can be prepared for the teething problems. However, a bit like new relationships - sometimes you have to take a leap into the dark - if you spent too much time weighing up the reasons why you should or shouldn't, you'd never live...

I like the way POM works
I like the way WOLPOM works

Win

Sounds like a win win situation - and that was WOLOP - thanks for your premature input (August vote recently mailed - hope you manage to remember the September one - to be with me by 7th October)
x

The current poem is an excellent one. The problem seems to be that a lot of mystery exists around how and why poems are chosen. Perhaps we should just knock the notion of 'Poem of the Month' on the head and replace it by Featured Poet of the Month. This poet could be chosen by the powers that be or the previous poet if admin wishes to hang on to the current system. I do think we should get rid of the notion of a serious competition having taken place though.

Poem Of The Month (POTM) - Please will people keep their comments to thoughts/critique of the poem and not to how it was chosen etc. – Discussions is appropriate for that type of debate.

Here are some of my thoughts.

POTM is chosen from the “Samples” section of the poets’ profile and a poet can be chosen only once. Poems in blogs are excluded because when POTM was set up there were no blogs and, latterly, we decided, that to include consideration of all the poems in blogs would make it an impossible task – it’s hard enough as it is.

It is up to the current POTM winner to choose the next POTM according to his/her tastes. You can critique the poem as much as you want to but please don’t attack the poets (either the picker or the winner).

It seems to me unfair to second-guess what poem a poet is going to pick before s/he picks it. To make such comments seems to me to be a form of intimidation and places the picker in a no-win situation. I’d ask therefore, that those of you who have placed such comments remove them. You may also care to reflect that the POTM process means that when you see this months poem, next months poem has already been selected. So the attempt at bribery is of no avail I’m afraid.

It’s been stated that people from the SE/London area keep winning POTM and that this will continue. Actually, if one looks through the POTM archive, the winners have come from all over the country, we even had one from Africa. Overall, I would say that the region with the largest number of POTM winners is the NW and we have had several winners from those who attend/have attended Write Out Loud events.

From elsewhere in Discussions there seems to be an assumption that people who don’t post, or post rarely at the moment, are somehow less worthy of winning POTM. Just because a person appears active on the site at this moment doesn’t mean their poetry is better than a poet who isn’t does it?

Underlying this attitude seems to be an assumption that those who post a lot at any given time are the Write Out Loud constituency. I dispute that.

There are plenty of people who have never or rarely posted who, nevertheless, contribute greatly to the site and/or the WOL community in general. We have several people, for instance, who provide regular information on gigs in different parts of the country. We have others who contribute news items, photos, reviews, help proof read etc. Most of our event co-ordinators don’t post much, whilst other people support and promote Write Out Loud in their own particular ways.

As Russell Thompson has pointed out elsewhere on Discussions, people who visit the site regularly feel part of the WOL extended family even though they might never post or even be on our contact list.

Further, the constituency of those who actually post is constantly changing. There are a handful of people who have posted for year after year, and their contribution has been invaluable in helping build the site. There are others who contributed significantly in the early years who now post little, if at all, again their contribution was invaluable at that time.

The norm, for the active user, seems to be to join up, get involved enthusiastically for a period (i.e. posting blogs, comments, discussions) and then ease off or even disappear. Although the majority of poets seem to be happy to simply post their profiles and update them periodically.

Some people are irritated at those who continually post several blogs at a time in the belief that sheer quantity will endear their work to other people whilst other people complain about those who comment on everything even when they have nothing to say about a topic. Some people are irritated by newbies who make all the same mistakes etc whilst others seem to think the more established poets shouldn’t use the site or that poets shouldn’t use the site to publicise themselves or their work. Others think exactly the opposite on each of these and other topics - Needless to say, sitting where I do, I get an ear bashing from all sides.

However, Write Out Loud is, and was designed to be, a broad church, and has (within our ‘Terms of use’) no prescription on how anyone chooses to use the site. Although we want everyone, of whatever level, to feel welcome, valued and comfortable with being a “member” – whatever that might mean to them.

I therefore ask that you don’t have a go at someone for winning POTM and leave the winner to use his/her discretion to choose the next one without any coercion or fear of what might be said about their choice. This obviously doesn’t preclude your comments/critiques of the poem itself.

If you haven’t won it yet, then you might one day and if you choose to accept it (some don’t) I’m sure you’ll want to feel relaxed about winning the award and picking what you think is the next best poem (er.. is that right ED?).

Finally, we set up POTM to be a bit of fun! There is no prize or particular kudos associated with it, it’s the opportunity for a winner to share a poem they particularly enjoyed at the time they chose it and not much more. What’s the problem with that?

Hi there.

Isobel - I will try to post a WOLOP in the right month, thanks. although it will be a task going through them all. Maybe it will encourage me to do exactly that, which will be no bad thing.

Paul (Admin) (Admin) I think your lengthy comments on POM nicely sum up the whole caboodle. I think they are detailed balanced and sensible.

WOL continues to grow and to flourish... hip hip hurrah

My few recurring niggles that remain are 1) no guidelines for new posting etiquette and the poor chat facillity (compared to other sites). I am tired of bringing these up however :-(

Win x

Thanks Paul for setting out the background so throughly, which is helpful to me and no doubt others who are relatively new to WOL. We don't know the history and don't have the bigger picture.
One thing I would like to say is that you are clearly doing something right - a lot of things right in truth. The stats point to that, and since joining I've come across a lot of very real appreciation of the site and those behind it. The recent debate about POTM also illustrates this - people don't spend that much time and energy on something they don't care about. Somehow, your approach to running WOL means that it is something that people strongly identify with and care about and think about (which can occasionally lead to them having inconvenient ideas!). It probably causes you more angst than the humble users always realise, but the proof of the pudding is there. Many thanks

Thanks for that lengthy statement Paul. It was perhaps time that someone from admin stepped in to give us some background to POM. I can understand your frustration - there is quite simply no way of pleasing everybody. My dislike of POM had resolved itself by you allowing me to trial WOLOP. However I admit to being perhaps disproportionately riled by 2 comments that were placed afterwards by the poet and another. I personally find blatant self publicising distasteful but am probably naive. WOL/ POM is obviously accepting of poets from all backgrounds with widely differing agendas - I guess it is really none of my business to question that.