Song Contest 131 (Results posted!)

[Song Contest]

Welcome to the One Hundred and Thirty First Song Contest! In lieu of a joke, please read the rules this time, they're different.

Submit your song via this FANCY FORM!

What is the MafiaScum Song Contest?

The MafiaScum Song Contest is a competition modeled after the annual Eurovision Song Contest. It's a means to gain exposure to new music through the tastes of your peers, like it or not. Those that enter must also vote for the people they are running against based on how much they like the songs. Everyone picks an alias in the form of a country (any one of your choosing) and sends in a song that they like in order to expose it to the other contestants. After voting, they are tallied in the thread and a winner is named. No matter who wins, everyone wins by gaining new knowledge of songs, artists, albums and genres of music in the process!

List of Previously Entered Songs

How to Participate in the Song Contest:

1. Find a song that you like on any internet medium that isn't restricted or private.

2. Submit it via the form linked above!

3. Wait until I reveal the entries. You may or may not be cut (as stated at the end of this post).

4. Once entries are revealed, you will rank your top 10 countries! You will do this via a Google Form link to be provided later. The point values are as follows:

12 points - 1st
10 - 2nd
8 - 3rd
7 - 4th
6 - 5st
5 - 6th
4 - 7th
3 - 8th
2 - 9th
1 - 10th

Please rate fairly by giving all countries a listen. You may not vote for yourself. Everyone, regardless of entry or cut status, may vote, so you can still participate even if you chose not to enter or if you got cut! However, if those that entered and are accepted do not vote, they will get a 20 point penalty and be banned from entering in the next contest, so please consider that before entering.

5. Wait for results. It's that simple!

What entries are/aren't allowed?

In order to eliminate bias, certain entries based on previous performance are banned. After dozens of contests and a following of a vague "Code of Ethics" by the Song Contest population, there have been so many entries that a rule system is now in place as to what can and cannot be entered. Please refer to the list of entered songs linked above and CTRL+F your artist AND song name to make sure it isn't included in the following list.

What isn't allowed?

-You cannot enter an artist that has won ANY contest in the past, no matter how far away that contest is.
-You cannot enter an artist that has been entered in the last 15 contests.
-You cannot enter a song that has been entered before, regardless of placement. (You can enter a cover or different version of that song.) For example: You cannot enter in "Seven Nation Army" by The White Stripes, but you can enter in "The Hardest Button to Button" by The White Stripes.
-You cannot enter an artist that has gotten Top 3 in a Battle of the Best. For example: You may not enter anything by the Doves, as they got 2nd in a BotB.
-You cannot enter something that is not a "song". We generally interpret this term very loosely, but here are some examples:

Things considered a song: Anything created with an actual artist and song title that is INTENDED for the listener, even if it's painful to listen or even if there's nothing included (Examples: Nirvana - Smells Like Teen Spirit, Eminem - Lose Yourself, Barney - I Love You, John Cage - 4'33, Sunn 0))) - 0))) Bow 1, etc.)

Things not considered a song: Anything without an artist or title, a video clip of something random, a comedy routine (unless it's an actual song a la Stephen Lynch), a large square wave, an animal barking, total silence not being attributed to an artist, etc. (Examples: A clip of Louis CK's Shameless, an ibex screeching, a clip of a game show, a clip of someone screaming, etc.)

I will let you know if your entry does not meet the criteria of a "song," but it should be fairly obvious.

What IS allowed, then?

-You can enter an artist that has gotten 2nd or lower at least 15 contests ago, as long as you do not repeat a song.
-You can enter an artist that got top 3 in a song contest, unless it won that contest or also got top 3 in a Battle of the Best.
-You can enter a different version of a song entered before, such as a cover (or the original if the cover was entered first). For example, Johnny Cash's "Hurt" has already been entered, but you can still enter Nine Inch Nails' "Hurt".

Other than that, you're good! If your entry violates one of these rules, you'll have until the deadline to fix it or we reserve the right to deny your entry (as if you haven't entered one at all) due to time constraints.

Reserved Countries

Bhutan
Central African Republic
Djibouti
Egypt
Greece
Greenland
Hungary
Iceland
India
Ireland
Liechtenstein
Mali
Poland
Portugal
Slovenia
South Korea
Sweden
United Kingdom
USA

Deadline for entries is Wednesday, June 12 at 11:59 p.m. Pacific Time.

If we get more than 26 entries, the 26 participants in the competition will be decided based on the following criteria:

1. First-time entrants

2. Last winner (ceejayvinoya and vizIIsto)

3. Current Song Contest Team (toolenduso and JurgenVW)

4. Any entrant who was cut in the period of the last 3 contests (except those cut for not voting) and has not used their guaranteed bid.
3 Contests remaining: Nobody!
2 Contests remaining: Nobody!
1 Contest remaining: Nobody!

5. Everyone else

Anyone who does not make the cut is guaranteed a spot in one of the next 3 contests.

The following people will be ineligible to enter for not voting in SC130 and BOTB7: In the interests of testing out this new format, I'm going to go ahead and skip the bans this time. I may or may not use the bans in the next contest instead. Idk.

[Song Contest]

NEW VOTING RULES

In the interest of speeding up contests, we are going to try a different system for the voting deadline. It was proposed by vizIIsto in BOTB7. Here's how it will work:

* The first voting deadline will be

seven days

after entries are posted. Anybody who votes during this period will receive all the points they get for their own entry.
* If, at the end of five days, the number of entrants who have voted is at least 75%, the votes will be tallied and a winner will be declared. Anybody who has not voted will have five points taken off the total value of the votes for their entry.
* If, at the end of five days, the number of entrants who have voted is less than 75%, the voting deadline will be extended another

three days

.
* Any entrant who failed to vote will have five points taken off the total value of the votes for their entry for each extension that happens before they've voted.
* The process will repeat until

16 days

have passed (three extensions after the initial five-day deadline). At the end of this period, anybody who has not voted will have a total 20 point penalty. The votes will be tallied regardless of how many people have voted.
* There will be no bans for failure to vote.

[Song Contest]

Entries!

Votes are due on Thursday, June 20 at 11:59 p.m. (23:59) Pacific Time!

Use this form to submit your votes!

Bolivia

Blue Sky Black Death - Absentee

Greenland

Boston Manor - Laika

Poland

half alive - still feel

Hungary

Arabeske - Kad procvatu behari

USA

Between You & Me - Dakota

Sweden

Carach Angren - Lingering in an Imprint Haunting

Norway

DJ Mikesh - Partycrasher (DJ Gollum ft. DJ Cap Remix Edit)

Israel

Jeroen van Koningsbrugge - Wit Licht

Japan

AB6IX - Breathe

Djibouti

Dua Lipa - New Rules

Portugal

Tacocat - Grains of Salt

Chad

FKA Twigs - Figure 8

Liechtenstein

The Beatles - Blackbird

Bhutan

Aaron Carter - Sooner or Later

[Song Contest]

Two questions I'd like to get feedback on for the new voting rules:

1. If no extensions are needed, should people who failed to vote receive any kind of penalty?
2. Should there be any bans under this new system?

[Aristophanes]

First!

I mean...
Ego!

[xyzzy]

I'd prefer that the first period be seven days so that it includes every day of the week—some people will be more available on certain days of the week.

I'm in favor of maintaining penalties regardless of extensions; in theory, without a penalty greater than the maximum number of points you can get from one other person, there could be scenarios where someone ranks higher because they didn't vote, and maintaining the impossibility of that is important.

I'm ambivalent to bans in general.

[Tammy]

I agree with xyzzy's suggestion for there being 7 days. Sometimes weekdays are too busy to be able to sit down and listen to songs; having the weekend to do it would be nice.

[Song Contest]

I'd prefer that the first period be seven days so that it includes every day of the week—some people will be more available on certain days of the week.

Good point. This issue could also be solved by manipulating the entry period to ensure that the five-day voting period will include weekends. Just an alternative suggestion. Idk if it's worth going that direction just to make it so the total possible number of days in the voting period is 14, but yeah.

I'm in favor of maintaining penalties regardless of extensions; in theory, without a penalty greater than the maximum number of points you can get from one other person, there could be scenarios where someone ranks higher because they didn't vote, and maintaining the impossibility of that is important.

Not quite sure I follow...why would a person rank higher because they didn't vote?

[Song Contest]

Wait wait I think I see what you're saying.

You're saying that somebody could adopt not voting as a strategy, so that they know they aren't contributing points to their "competitors," right?

[xyzzy]

right—let's say you are in first place before considering your own ratings. you have 70 points, second place has 60, and third place has 55, and you would've given your 12 and 10 to the second and third place people respectively had you voted, but you didn't bother voting. in this case, if you aren't penalized for not voting, you would maintain first place as a result of nonparticipation.

it's unlikely anyone would intentionally exploit this, but it's good that the points system makes it impossible.

[PJ.]

It's also impossible to know. To do it.

[PJ.]

And if you don't vote at all you still lose 20pts.

[xyzzy]

I took "any kind of penalty" to include the 20 point penalty for not voting.

[Song Contest]

right—let's say you are in first place before considering your own ratings. you have 70 points, second place has 60, and third place has 55, and you would've given your 12 and 10 to the second and third place people respectively had you voted, but you didn't bother voting. in this case, if you aren't penalized for not voting, you would maintain first place as a result of nonparticipation.

it's unlikely anyone would intentionally exploit this, but it's good that the points system makes it impossible.

Spoiler: Long reply

I spent a while yesterday thinking about this and possible alternatives. First and foremost, I came to the conclusion that if we institute some kind of penalty for not voting

even if there are no extensions,

then it will mitigate, if not entirely solve, the issue. The logic being that if somebody was going to deliberately fail to vote in order to withhold points from competitors (because they could get away with it if there were no extensions), then adding a penalty for failing to vote under any circumstances adds a disincentive for that behavior.

Fortunately, there are pieces of the existing process that make it fairly illogical for somebody to consciously act out such a gambit, namely the fact that you don't know very much before votes are posted. You don't know how many people have voted, who's voted, how they voted or what the running tally is. So if somebody was choosing not to vote in order to withhold points from competitors, they would be risking a penalty (or, if we added a penalty even if there was no extensions, they would be choosing a penalty) without having any idea whether it would actually help them or not. There are several people who post their reviews, and more or less say who they're voting for, before the votes are posted, but having been on both sides of the process I can tell you that those

do not

give you a very good idea of who's actually getting the most points.

As for the concern about somebody being able to place above others because they didn't vote (which I'm thinking of as kind of a "miscarriage of justice" concept, to overdramatize things), I don't see a good way around it. We could fiddle with the number of points given as a penalty, but then we would be ramping up the penalties to a point where they could become ridiculously large and after a certain point I think it would cease mattering to people whether they got a 20 point penalty or a 30 point penalty. We could change the number of extensions or the number of days in each extension, but then we would be threatening the speed of the contest, which is the point of trying out this new system in the first place.

A 5-point minimum penalty for non-voting, though, does make it less likely that a person who didn't vote ranks above others because of their non-vote. Doesn't make it impossible, but it roughly cuts the likelihood in half.

And lastly, on a more philosophical level, it occurred to me that the whole penalty system is basically a way of balancing out different anti-corruption-of-the-results policies. That is, the penalty exists in the first place so that people will vote, and therefore the winners will come as close as possible to reflecting the actual opinions of the contest's participants. If very few people voted, the results wouldn't mean much. But the penalties themselves are another form of corrupting the results, because they drag down entries that people liked enough to vote for. The original voting system was built like the goal was to get as many people to vote as possible; the new system is built like it's fine for a quarter of people not to vote. So if it's fine for a quarter of the entrants not to vote, why corrupt the results by applying big penalties? A 5-point penalty discourages non-voting, but probably won't have a

huge

impact on the overall results.

[Song Contest]

Personally my guess is that going beyond one extension will be a very rare occurrence. The "ramping up" effect of the system will be a good way to get people moving, I think.

[Xtoxm]

a points penalty of some kind for not voting is essential. logically, voting is always bad, because you

have

to give points to others. (if anyone was playing to win)
at a minimum the penalty should be 12 points, but i'd say keep it at 20.

(and this is independent to banning someone from future contests, idc about bans)

[Song Contest]

Under this system, penalties are chopped up into chunks -- do you mean 12 points total, or 12 points each time there's an extension and somebody fails to vote?

[Xtoxm]

an extension doesnt change the math
any time someone hasnt voted by whatever point you process the results, a points penalty is required for that entry for competition integrity

[Xtoxm]

right, i see what you're saying. if theres an extension and the person then votes, no penalty is required.
im only talking about people who end up not voting by the time you process results.

[Plotinus]

Time to right side with a beautiful song

[pickemgenius]

cheesy pop punk tune in time for summer.

amazin.

[MiniDeathStar]

More black metal inc

[vizIIsto]

I'll share my opinions on some of the tweaking suggestions mentioned (finally. I've been on holiday so that's why):

Two questions I'd like to get feedback on for the new voting rules:

1. If no extensions are needed, should people who failed to vote receive any kind of penalty?
2. Should there be any bans under this new system?

1. Yes. It should still be the -20 point penalty of the old system. People need to be triggered to vote, and if the penalty would be smaller if there were less extensions, there's not enough stimula to vote.

2. That's up to you, Song Contest. I think bans should only be handed out if either all extensions are needed, and those who didn't vote get a ban. Or maybe also if someone fails to vote in two consecutive contests with shorter voting deadlines.

I'd prefer that the first period be seven days so that it includes every day of the week—some people will be more available on certain days of the week.

[...]

That seems reasonable. I have been on holiday the past week, and in case the voting deadline was in that one week, I would have missed out on voting. But like Song Contest mentioned later, adjusting the deadlines so that the first period (of five days) includes a weekend, there would be less cases of people simply not being able to vote. However, holiday tourists like me would still suffer. But that would be the same with seven days, right?

right—let's say you are in first place before considering your own ratings. you have 70 points, second place has 60, and third place has 55, and you would've given your 12 and 10 to the second and third place people respectively had you voted, but you didn't bother voting. in this case, if you aren't penalized for not voting, you would maintain first place as a result of nonparticipation.

it's unlikely anyone would intentionally exploit this, but it's good that the points system makes it impossible.

And that's why point penalties should be given.

right, i see what you're saying.

if theres an extension and the person then votes, no penalty is required.

im only talking about people who end up not voting by the time you process results.

No no no.

Lemme explain. And this is the main point I want to make to why I am convinced my system, as proposed, works best.

If the people who would only vote after one or multiple extensions and NOT receive a penalty, this allows misabuse of the system. They would just wait until the final extension and then vote. That ruins the goal of fixing the problem this suggestion tries to fix.
There NEED to be point penalties after each extension to enforce all contestants enough to vote. Then the system can't be abused in any way. In fact, the only way it COULD be abused is if everyone voted before the first extension and give non-voters a 20-point penalty because the voting deadline was so short. And that's exactly what we want to get.

So I still suggest a flexible deadline, where there can be three extensions and -5 point penalties for non-voters after every deadline has passed. The length of the submission period and the length of the initial voting deadline (before extensions, that is) can be tweaked, but that's it. We need to make this suggestion work like how it's supposed to work. (or, in other words: like how I suggested it to work. lmao )

[Song Contest]

Two questions I'd like to get feedback on for the new voting rules:

1. If no extensions are needed, should people who failed to vote receive any kind of penalty?
2. Should there be any bans under this new system?

1. Yes. It should still be the -20 point penalty of the old system. People need to be triggered to vote, and if the penalty would be smaller if there were less extensions, there's not enough stimula to vote.

2. That's up to you, Song Contest. I think bans should only be handed out if either all extensions are needed, and those who didn't vote get a ban. Or maybe also if someone fails to vote in two consecutive contests with shorter voting deadlines.

1. So then the penalty would be larger if there are no extensions than if there is at least one extension (in other words, if you fail to vote and there is an extension, you get a five point penalty, but if you fail to vote and there's no extension, you get a 20 point penalty). I mean, I guess it works, it just seems kinda backwards to me. The "cost" to the contest is greater if there is an extension.

2. I'm leaning toward no bans, based on input and my own feelings. Bans mean fewer people able to enter each contest, and we've got low participation as it is.

[InflatablePie]

re: low participation, would moving the SC to MishMash give a participation/visibility boost? I say this as someone who's clicked on mishmash maybe a dozen times ever, mostly by accident, but MM does seem to have more of a community nowadays than GD

in favor of no bans btw, or a next contest ban after 2 consecutive contests of missing the full deadline.

also probably entering a band I've seen live recently that was pretty great.