• SHL & SMJHL Media Scales has changed to reflect 100 words = 100k at a flat rate.
  
• Articles that go above and beyond word count are subject to bonues (up to 2x) to graders discretion (ie. extensive stats, research, or graphics).
  
• Pressers will now be worth 50% of the new scale (100 words = 50k). (this has already taken place in the SMJHL Media section, it will now be in effect for the SHL Media Section as well).
  
• SPREADSHEETS SUBMITTED BY THEMSELVES WILL ALSO BE GRADED UNDER THE PRESSER SCALE.
  
• A 6 person cap on players who can be paid from a single podcast.
  

Quote:Originally posted by CRUTCHFIELD@May 18 2017, 12:44 PM
We are very excited to see what these changes bring to both Media sections of the site.

Quote:Originally posted by Phobospwns@May 18 2017, 02:26 PM

Maybe I'm missing something... but my first reaction to this part of the post is:  "None?"

The only change is the pay scale, and nerfing pressers.  Adding a possible 2X bonus for quality is just an extension of manipulation of the pay scale.

My last article was 4086 words.  I thought it was pretty god damned good, frankly; probably my best media post ever.  I got 5.5 million for it, which isn't bad.  I assume that pay was based on the grading on the rules page, plus the 1 million dollar bonus for a 3k+ word article (which, to be honest, I've only heard exists, I don't really know for sure):

4000 words- 4.5 mil + 1 million bonus = 5.5

Naturally, it appears my work wasn't up to whatever criteria qualifies for extra money for being "above and beyond", but that's OK, it is what it is.  Maybe I should have tossed some pics or gifs in there, and used some flashy fonts.  I'm not much of a graphics guy, and I figure that probably knocks me down a peg.  The content itself was well thought out, well presented, and well written.  Fair enough, though- I respect the grader decision.  I think it's fair to assume that it likely wouldn't qualify for any kind of bonus under this new system, either, right?

That same article, under this "new" change would net me what: $4,086,000?  That's of course if the resolution goes that low.  Maybe it'd only be a straight 4 million.  This is supposed to encourage me to go more above and beyond?  It just doesn't add up.  Disappointing.

Edit:&nbsp; Maybe the podcast thing is a good one.&nbsp; I've never done one, and honestly I've only listened to 1 ever (One of yours, <a href='index.php?showuser=1770' rel='nofollow' alt='profile link' class='user-tagged mgroup-13'>Allen</a>, be proud).&nbsp; I can't really speak to that aspect of it whatsoever, so it might be great.&nbsp; I just wanted to make note of that.

Quote:Originally posted by Phobospwns@May 18 2017, 11:26 AM
4000 words- 4.5 mil + 1 million bonus = 5.5

Quote:Originally posted by Phobospwns@May 18 2017, 12:26 PM

Maybe I'm missing something... but my first reaction to this part of the post is:&nbsp; "None?"

The only change is the pay scale, and nerfing pressers.&nbsp; Adding a possible 2X bonus for quality is just an extension of manipulation of the pay scale.

My last article was 4086 words.&nbsp; I thought it was pretty god damned good, frankly; probably my best media post ever.&nbsp; I got 5.5 million for it, which isn't bad.&nbsp; I assume that pay was based on the grading on the rules page, plus the 1 million dollar bonus for a 3k+ word article (which, to be honest, I've only heard exists, I don't really know for sure):

4000 words- 4.5 mil + 1 million bonus = 5.5

Naturally, it appears my work wasn't up to whatever criteria qualifies for extra money for being "above and beyond", but that's OK, it is what it is.&nbsp; Maybe I should have tossed some pics or gifs in there, and used some flashy fonts.&nbsp; I'm not much of a graphics guy, and I figure that probably knocks me down a peg.&nbsp; The content itself was well thought out, well presented, and well written.&nbsp; Fair enough, though- I respect the grader decision.&nbsp; I think it's fair to assume that it likely wouldn't qualify for any kind of bonus under this new system, either, right?

That same article, under this "new" change would net me what: $4,086,000?&nbsp; That's of course if the resolution goes that low.&nbsp; Maybe it'd only be a straight 4 million.&nbsp; This is supposed to encourage me to go more above and beyond?&nbsp; It just doesn't add up.&nbsp; Disappointing.

Edit:&nbsp; Maybe the podcast thing is a good one.&nbsp; I've never done one, and honestly I've only listened to 1 ever (One of yours, <a href='index.php?showuser=1770' rel='nofollow' alt='profile link' class='user-tagged mgroup-13'>Allen</a>, be proud).&nbsp; I can't really speak to that aspect of it whatsoever, so it might be great.&nbsp; I just wanted to make note of that.

Quote:Originally posted by DrunkenTeddy@May 18 2017, 12:46 PM

The bonus 1m would not have been because of the length, it would have been because of the quality. I believe that was the max bonus to be awarded in the old system. Now instead that article would be worth 4m just for the words and up to an additional 4m based on quality. So instead of a scale where your article was worth anywhere from 4.5 to 5.5m, it's now in a scale from 4m to 8m.

Quote:Originally posted by CRUTCHFIELD@May 18 2017, 02:56 PM
- nerfing pressers was a good thing to do, and we took a lesson from the SMJHL HO and got it done.
- I think your article would qualify for a bonus under the new system (I looked it over) and it was written well. Not a 2x bonus but I could see something like a 1.5x for it if I was grading it personally, so $4,000,000 * 1.5 = $6,000,000 total. Subject to graders discretion of course. We want to reward people that put the extra work in
- not sure where you're getting this $1M bonus for a 3K word article is. Maybe with the jump in the pay scale I could see, but AFAIK there was no "bonus" given to articles over 3K, just a jump in the media scale which was a little ridiculous imo (especially when it encouraged members to write long articles that created 0 discussion and then break them into 3 parts so they got more $$ for it, more the power to them though).

Quote:Originally posted by Phobospwns@May 18 2017, 01:12 PM

I'm totally fine with nerfing pressers.&nbsp; I did a few, and always tried to keep them "on point", but I've definitely seen them just be chalk full of piss and shit to boost word count.&nbsp; No reason people can't ask/answer questions within the context of a broader article (which as I recall from the "talking time" over this change, would put them in as a "standard" article).

I guess a bonus for X length was more or less a myth.&nbsp; As I said in my original post, I wasn't sure if it was real, but the fact that I'd heard it often shows that there's plenty of mis-information out there as far as grading goes.&nbsp; If I got the max bonus for that article, cool.&nbsp; Maybe this change will clear up some confusion in this regard.

I can definitely identify with adding a bonus to account for "calculation/research" time.&nbsp; I did an article when I first got into the league which included that stuff, and I felt I was way under paid, so I never did another article.

My 4k word article took me a few hours, IIRC.&nbsp; If a 2k word article with some research takes the same amount of time, and is about the same quality it should result in about the same payout.&nbsp; That's fair.

I just... dunno.&nbsp; Maybe we'll see a higher caliber of media now.&nbsp; I guess this at least opens the door, but I just don't know if it will do a whole lot (other than piss people who love pressers off, lol).&nbsp; No offense, of course, just chipping in my own opinion.

Edit:&nbsp; I don't want people to think I'm complaining about the pay level on my article.&nbsp; 5.5 million, if you do twitter, is 7 weeks of max training.&nbsp; Like 3 hours of writing for 7 weeks of training seems pretty fair- that's 26 minutes of writing a week.&nbsp; If that turns into 6 million, or 8 million now; hey, cool.&nbsp; It frankly, probably won't change what I'm putting out, though.&nbsp; Maybe I'm an exception, or just thinking about it the wrong way.

Quote:Originally posted by CRUTCHFIELD@May 18 2017, 03:16 PM
just wanting to clear things up for all parties.

Quote:Originally posted by mpc@May 18 2017, 08:18 PM
I see having team podcasts is being discouraged... Aight.

Some of the most fun I've had on the site were the old MC's gonna MC Podcasts with the Discord. Multiple opinions and tons of variant discussion? Yes please. But I get it that it's hard to justify divvying up a pod like that.

Just kinda sucks.

Quote:Originally posted by Kevin "Juice" Bieksa@May 18 2017, 02:41 PM

Im thinking it's not to discourage it but it's to make it easier for graders who are sick of having to divide pay among 6+ people.