zootoo.com Bringing pet lovers together to help pets and each other

May
21
2008

8:37pm

The second million dollar makeover contest: how to ensure "equal opportunity"

Posted by hymcheng in Shelter Makeover

59 comments

I had made a comment on another person's journal entry that generated more interest (and concern) than I had expected from my fellow ZooTooers. I think it would be worthwhile recapping and elaborating on that comment:

When I heard that this was not the first and only million dollar makeover, but that a second makeover contest would be unveiled this summer, one question immediately popped into my mind. How does ZooToo ensure that next year's Top 20 group will go into the 20-shelter site tour on an equal footing? Stated another way, if 3 shelters have already been deemed more "deserving" than 17 others (from the inaugural makeover contest), what are the chances that this year's bottom 17 will make it into next year's Top 3? Here is one hypothetical scenario that illustrates this problem:

Let's say that St. Louis is ineligible for next year's contest. That still leaves Jefferson and Ohio Valley in the running. Let's assume that they AND the original bottom 17 make it into next year's Top 20, plus a new shelter. If the guidelines for determining which shelters are more "deserving" are preserved, Jefferson and Ohio Valley would automatically end up in the Top 3, leaving 18 other shelters (the original bottom 17 and the new shelter) vying for ONE open slot. It would be illogical for Jefferson and Ohio Valley to be left out of next year's Top 3, because it would invalidate this year's decision.

This poses a serious dilemma for the original bottom 17, because they need to decide if it is worthwhile to enter into next year's contest, given this year's decision. I am very interested to hear everyone's opinion on how the second makeover contest can be made more "fair." Here are just a few hypothetical solutions that I've come up with (I am NOT endorsing any of them, only suggesting loopholes around this apparent dilemma), although each has its own problems:

Hypothetical solution #1: The original Top 3 are ineligible for next year's contest. Perhaps the other 4 shelters that received more than $6,000 should also be made ineligible, because on some aspects they have been deemed "better" than the remaining 14.

Hypothetical solution #2: The original Top 20 are ALL made ineligible for next year's contest.

Hypothetical solution #3: The original bottom 19 are all eligible, however, ZooToo resorts to a completely objective system to determine the grand prize winner. eg., The shelter that earns the most number of points wins automatically.

Hypothetical solution #4: The original bottom 19 are all eligible. However, ZooToo uses a completely DIFFERENT set of critera to determine which is most deserving. ie., NOT need, community commitment, best practices, and efforts to get more animals adopted.

As they say, hindsight is 20/20. From where I am sitting, it looks like the second contest would have been better served had ZooToo NOT announced who the first- and second-runners up were, and simply chosen one winner, St. Louis, from the pool of 20.

Anyways, I would love to hear the input of everyone, including those directly affiliated with ZooToo (eg., Cupcake, daisysdad, Marcello, etc.). I am sure many ZooTooers are also interested to find out how the second contest will be structured. Only then can they make an informed choice of whether or not to participate in next year's contest, and if so, the level of effort they will put into earning points.



Discussion

Comment on this entry


59 comments found.
We're all here to help each other as well as our pets and pets that still in the shelters. This was the first contest there is bound to be mistakes and we learn from our mistakes and improve. Just think we are helping these animals weather our shelters win or lose we are there for them and that is what counts.
I've read and pondered both hymcheng's posting here, and hymcheng's response to "ZooToo Makeover very misleading" since right after they were posted, letting my own comment "gel" and finally come forth through the keyboard. For the second contest, the activity level of each ZooTooer becomes vital for success, but please think about the folks that are just starting out as ZooTooers and are facing some of the same questions and frustrations that we, too, faced when we first registered. Sure, many of the bugs have been worked out, but some remain. It's also a daunting proposition to develop the confidence, ability and sticktuitiveness to rack up the points. Such things must be learned and they take time. Let's encourage the new folks that don't yet have "boucou" points, It hasn't been that long ago that they were us! We all tried very, very hard and for those that didn't make the "top twenty," it's the positive attitude that makes the winners: The "no matter what, we're giving our very best, win or not" mindset is what makes winners, winners. The fact that the shelter I support (Humane Society of Madison County, in London, Ohio) eventually made tenth place does not color my comments. There were bound to be growing pains and a lot of learning on the first contest. Heck, I didn't even know there was a contest until there was only five weeks left! I can tell you, with a slow dial-up connection and no way to get my AVI 29-second videos to upload, I had to learn what to do to add points and do it legitimately. Reviewing products and then photographing Wiggles using those products was my "secret." It was very time-intensive and I let other things slip during those five weeks, but the need to help our little shelter was so strong, the cause so good, the deadline approaching so quickly, and the conviction so urgent, somehow the points went from the teens to the hundreds and then to the thousands. Sure, I could grouse about not having a highspeed connection, or about the fact that, for whatever reason, AVI videos don't match with ZooToo, but to what end? We are trying to help our beloved animals. That's what it's all about. Nothing else matters! We do our best. If the powers that be for whatever reason don't measure up to whatever our standards are, so what? Life is life; let's make the second contest all it can be and keep trying for our animals. They deserve our best. Quitting is not an option. It never is. Trying means seeing problems merely as opportunitied in work clothes!
hymcheng
hymcheng
4 months ago
Flag this | Reply
Other suggestions for improving next year's contest: I think not giving points simply for registration or inviting friends to join ZooToo might solve a few problems. It might cut back on the number of duplicate accounts, but it also makes the total points for each shelter be more a reflection of the ACTIVITY and CONTRIBUTION of the individual supporters to ZooToo (eg., writing product reviews, commenting on news stories, etc). Those individuals who register but do nothing else really bring nothing to the ZooToo community, and in my opinion, should not be rewarded for it, and neither should their shelter. Only activities that are meaningful should be rewarded. Also, it would be nice to remove all daily maximums on # of news comments / reviews that can be written. That would mean that shelters with fewer members have a better chance of getting into the Top 20, as long as they have enthusiastic supporters who are willing to write a lot of comments / reviews.
I agree that "daily limits" should be eliminated. Zootooers with full-time jobs and family obligations have limited time to spare on some days, so they should be able to do as much as possible on the days they have more free time. I know there were days when I "maxed out" on product reviews and had to wait until the next day to submit more entries. It was frustrating having to be idle and not being able to contribute more when I had the time to devote to zootooing. Moreover, Zootoo submitted pet news stories for comments on a somewhat irregular basis (i.e., different times of the day and different number of submissions per day), thereby offering more or fewer ways of earning points. Considering that Zootooers have such varied schedules, they should be able to be as supportive as possible when time permits.

I agree completely that daily limits should be elimiated. People who work and have other commitments often do all of their computer work on one or two days a week.
Well, Zootoo recently implemented some changes in the point system (though not necessarily for the second makeover contest) and there are now daily limits that really are quite limiting! A Zootooer may still submit material after the daily limit is reached, but apparently will not receive any points once s/he has "maxed out".
Not recruiting new members of the community may be contrary to zootoo's ideal, but I agree that these "one shot" participants aren't really contributing to the contest. They take two minutes to register and then "go away". This may help explain why there are a number of duplicate complaints about the contest outcome--these people (who I call "disconnected" and disinterested) reemerge to complain but apparently did not read any comments during the contest. If they had, they might have known that others were pointing out problems of the contest as the contest progressed (and they wouldn't have been so shocked over the outcome).

I think it would be nice if there were ways to get "bonus points" for something like locating a new product and being the first to review it. In the first contest, zootooers could "add a product" but they didn't receive any more points than someone who merely responded to products already in the contest. This would be like a "finder's reward"--with maybe an extra 100 or even 500 points attached.

Another possibility would be to include special areas where people could submit a photo or video for others to vote on, such as "funniest" video and "most unusual" pet photo. You wouldn't be allowed to vote on an entry from your own shelter, so the "winner" of these "mini-contests within a contest" would be fairer. Something like this could be a way of earning maybe 1,000 points.
hymcheng
hymcheng
4 months ago
Flag this | Reply
I think not rewarding points simply for registering or recruiting supporters does NOT necessarily discourage the increase in membership. Don't forget, by recruiting supporters, your shelter has another pair of hands (and a mind) to help earn legitimate points by writing comments/reviews. You are simply asking that they do more than just register.

You mentioned some creative ways to earn "bonus points" and I think those are all great ideas to enhance the quality of the ZooToo experience!
Just a thought.....1 million dollars is alot of money for any 1 shelter. Maybe the money should be divided up into a larger amount for EACH of the top twenty shelters. It just seems to me that the needs of many outweigh the needs of a few. In all fairness I think that this was the first major contest on this site and I'm hoping that zootoo will work out some of the snafus that were encountered with this one.
I agree with Judy. I would have liked to have seen the money divided up differently. Everyone in the TOP20 is obviously grateful for the money earned even if you were not part of the TOP3, but think of how much more of an effect a bigger prize would mean to many! Good idea Judy!
I really wish a zootoo staffmember would comment on this journal entry. I, too, would like to know "how will the winner of the next contest be selected?" it's an interesting dilemma and am looking forward to hearing how they will be doing the next one.
hymcheng
hymcheng
4 months ago
Flag this | Reply
Hi Lauren,

Please scroll down and read Marcello D.'s comment. He is a ZooToo staff member.

Mary
hymcheng
hymcheng
4 months ago
Flag this | Reply
Here's another variation of that hypothetical problem. Given the scenario that I have drawn above, the original bottom 17 will have ZERO chance of walking off with the makeover prize next year. Why? Because: 1) either the new shelter ends up in the Top 3 with O.V. and Jefferson, or 2) one of the original bottom 17 ends up in the Top 3 along with O.V. and Jefferson. In the second case, based on this year's results, that "original bottom 17" shelter would automatically be second runner-up and either O.V. or Jefferson wins the makeover prize. Sombering realization....
Here's one thing to consider when we think about this problem. Many of the shelters (and this would be all shelters - not just the top 20) have generated considerable community interest and have recieved donations which should allow them to make some repairs and improvements and new volunteers who can do things like paint, mow grass, scoop poop and other things to help out. Now it's up to each of the individual shelters to move forward and keep that initial momentum going. If we sit back and do nothing then we will recieve nothing in return. This is not a case where the old saying "All good things come to he who waits" applies. This is a case where "OK - you started it, now keep it going" is more appropriate.

So, and this is just my opinion, but I think that it is only fair that St. Louis sits out but everyone else should feel free to jump in and se who comes out in the top 20 again. I'm sure that some of the original ones will be there a second time around but there will almost certainly be some new faces as well.

Make sure that the rules are "Crystal clear" on who will be considered and that the shelter with the most votes is not necessarily the winner. I suspect that a lot of the problems with the first contest were more of a media problem than they were a shelter problem. We all know that the media sometimes forgets to tell all of the story and I just have to feel that this is what happened here.

The last thing we all need to remember is that the real winners here are the animals that are helped. They didn't ask to be put in the position that they are in and need us to help them get into an acceptable position (a loving and caring family environment) so it becomes our duty to do just that.
hymcheng
hymcheng
4 months ago
Flag this | Reply
Hi Bill,

I agree with all of your points--they are all excellent. I used the most extreme example to illustrate my hypothesis, but even under less extreme circumstances, the predictions are the same: if either Jefferson or O.V. are in next year's Top 20, as well as SOME of the bottom 17, those in the bottom 17 would always rank below Jefferson or O.V. and not win the makeover, assuming that the rules of engagement are kept exactly the same. The purpose of my post is to try to bring some equity to next year's contest for ALL involved. I certainly am not saying that people should ZooToo for the sole purpose of that makeover contest. In fact, I've enjoyed ZooToo quite a bit AFTER the contest ended. I also completely agree that contest or no contest, each shelter should do what it does best: help the animals. Many shelters have gained new supporters and volunteers as a result of ZooToo, so they should really maximize on this in moving forward in their mission.

Mary
I think that if this years top 20 made it into next years top 20, that Zootoo would look hard at what they have accomplished over the previous year.
And maybe the next contest will not be to redo the shelter, but maybe new items for the shelter. Meaning new kennels, flooring, storage, a van, computer, things like this. Then shelters who might need those things have a better chance. Storage, our shelter is pretty good on. However, we need new kennels, a new van, a computer.

And not sure if the same 17 bottom shelters would be up there. After all, some of our supporters were very upset that we did not win and might not want to spend time like they did before to be disappointed again.

You really made a lot of good points here, and I am very interested to hear how others suggest these built in draw backs could be remedied. The one thing I thought about was that maybe there should be different judges for the next contest. Since we all acknowledge that "deserving" is subjective, having different people involved in judging would virtually guarantee a different outcome from the last top three. The new judges would have different opinions about what shelter programs have the biggest impact, and which are the most deserving, and have "fresh eyes" on the whole process of shelter visits.
Obviously it would only be right if Richard was still a judge. And it sounds kind of harsh against the other judges, but it would be something to at least consider. What do you think?
Cassie3
Cassie3
4 months ago
Flag this | Reply
That doesn't sound harsh at all. It's a good idea.

I have another concern. As a zoomaster, I completed 615 product reviews, 17 pages of photo reviews, and 6 pages of video reviews--all in two months. I lived on zootoo. Realistically, I will not have firsthand experience to review another 615 products. How will the top 20 shelters compete on a level playing field when the top points earners have already reviewed every product they could legitimately review and have coerced all family members and friends to join zootoo?
hymcheng
hymcheng
4 months ago
Flag this | Reply
You brought up and excellent point, Cassie3. I also wondered if it was realistic for the Zoomasters to realistically rack up a sizable number of points by writing product/service reviews for the second contest. Perhaps one way to get around this is for ZooToo to give points when an update is written for existing reviews. Again, I think they should impose a minimum character limit, to avoid one-word updates like "excellent!". Also, I think ZooToo should award different amount of points for different levels of effort. Say you wrote a comment/review that is under 100 characters, then you should get fewer points than someone writing a 200-500 character comment/review.
The concern over the number of available product reviews one could write in the future is somewhat valid. However, there are thousands of pet products out there, so it is posible that more could be written. If the search for a specific product would reveal that specific product, it wouldn't take so much time to locate (and then write) a review. New pet products are introduced quite frequently; many people can try these products by buying a "trial size" or even getting a free sample, and thereby having more products to review. But I mostly agree that at least some zootooers have practically exhausted the legitimate possibilities.

There is still the problem of what to do about the "cheaters" or manipulators. I got the impression MANY times that some people simply read other zootooers' reviews to have an idea of what to write about the product (i.e., they "copied") because they never tried it themselves and otherwise would not have an inkling of what to write. I also think many people gave less than superior products a rating of "5" so that they could feel justified in not having to fill in the "negative" (or "con") line about the product, making it easier and faster to finish. I also saw a few instances wherein some zootooers merely went down the list of available products and wrote product reviews for the first ten consecutive products that appeared, and did the next 10 products the following day, etc. What is the probability that any one person would, in fact, have and/or already tried ALL ten (twenty, thirty) of these products, especially since similar items were grouped together (e.g., cat furniture)? Seriously, these people would have had to bought numerous near-identical items from multiple manufacturers in order for this to be true. I can see having a couple different pet brushes or combs, but one of every brush/comb and cat tree made by each manufacturer is too farfetched to be believable. The failure of many people to point out obvious problems or difficulties with certain products offers additional evidence that many "faked" having tried the products.

Combining all the concerns that have been raised thus far, it seems apparent that a second contest would have to have added features for earning points (or, as the case may be, "legitimate" points).
Cassie3
Cassie3
4 months ago
Flag this | Reply
If I was starting "from scratch," I could write 615 reviews and then some. I am not going to purchase an additional 615 new products to write legitimate reviews. I KNOW you are not suggesting that.

It's as simple as this: If I were a newbie on the site, I would be in a better position than a zoomaster.

I agree with you--cheating ran rampant from the mass, duplicated reviews against anything leather, anything AKC, etc., to the malicious flagging used as a way to delete points from a competing shelter. Add the large number of fake accounts (perhaps the requirement of a photo and one review might stop that). Some shelters encouraged users to "volunteer" for the extra 100 points while assuring them that they wouldn't have to volunteer at all.

In defense of the people who gave reviews on different combs, brushes, whatever: We have four drills, more ice scrapers that you can count, probably ten paint rollers and five extension rods for paint rollers, three herbicide sprayers, four rakes, three snow shovels, etc. I have had pets for all of my life and have moved many times. I try different things so see if they'll work better. Sometimes things are lost in a move, sometimes things are misplaced, sometimes the item just stunk. Sometimes it ended up under the furniture courtesy of a cat. In any case, we go out and get a replacement. I am not saying everyone is like that, but we are not alone in this flaw.

At least someone found my concern somewhat valid and mostly agreed with me. That was encouraging.
I mostly agree with what you are saying. I, too, have three snow shovels, two rakes, two shovels, 15? litter boxes, etc. And I realize that established shelters may have many, many things. But something like expensive cat furniture is not as likely to be found; IF some shelters have this much, they are either spending too much on things other than basic necessities and/or have a lot of money to spend. I'm not saying that cats don't need furniture, trees, etc., but I don't it is likely that the seemingly excessive amounts would be found in any shelter or home.
hymcheng
hymcheng
4 months ago
Flag this | Reply
Hi Gini,

I never even thought of that, but I think it is an INGENIOUS idea to have a new panel of judges (of course, with Richard as the "top" judge still). This might avoid having to make the original Top 20 ineligible for next year's contest.

Mary
FROM ZOOTOO: Dear All, allow me to thank you for your incredible insights and suggestions. You are the reason why this web site is getting better and better.

We'd also like to remind to all users that Zootoo has created the "Helping Hands" program where we share our revenues with shelters and rescue groups to create a LONG TERM, EVERY DAY, NEW WAY TO HELP PETS without having to donate a dime. If you wish to donate money, please do it, but directly to your shelter. This is not a contest. It's simply based on the number of active users/points on the site. The Zootoo Class of 2008 (the top 20) has obviously an advantage as they already have the most number of affiliates. Which means, ALL of your efforts are not wasted because the contest is over. All other shelters can benefit from this program by keep sharing their "pet knowledge", not just through reviews, but also through Journals, answers and more. We're here to stay to help pet shelters or rescues weather you like it or not :)

We realize no set of rules will ever make everyone happy, but we need some order when running a contest. The first contest was not easy. Nevertheless, unlike some users have erroneously commented, we never changed them. They were clear from the beginning to all shelters and on posted on the site for everyone to see.

--On a personal note, we were saddened by the amount of cheating on duplicate accounts and fake reviews. Given that our goal is to create a site capable of preventing a second pet food recall, reviews that said "wow" on a potentially harmful product were not providing any value to another pet lover inquiring about that particular item. We were appalled by some shelter supporters reviewing negatively shelters on the other side of the country or praising vets with shady reputation, just to get points. Hopefully, this will also stop, next year.--

Regarding the next makeover: We will announce the new rules in a few weeks. Rest assure that we are listening and learning from your comments which we will very likely include in the next contest.

Thanks for helping pets and each other,

Marcello D.
hymcheng
hymcheng
4 months ago
Flag this | Reply
Dear Marcello,

Thank you for commenting on the journal entry! To be honest, the first contest was completely exhausting for me. It was only after March 31st that I started to truly appreciate the OTHER wonderful things that ZooToo had to offer, such as connecting with like-minded people across the US, reading their journal entries, engaging in spirited banter on the message boards, etc. I like the idea of the "Helping Hands" program, because it allows us to use ZooToo at a less-than-breakneck speed and still be able to contribute financially to our shelter. I think many of the Top 20 would agree.

Can I make a few more suggestions? The "WOW" comments, 25 times over on the same news stories by individuals, were extremely annoying. To get around this loophole, can ZooToo impose a minimum character limit, say 200 characters per news story. Alternatively, can you set up a rule that you can only write in complete sentences (at least 1 noun and 1 verb)? Can your computer programs differentiate between complete and incomplete sentences? It was just very frustrating competing against that.

I have never blogged or used an open forum such as this one before, until ZooToo came along. Despite all of the stress and frustration of the first contest, I do enjoy using ZooToo. It has been fun! I think the ZooToo team should give themselves a pat on the back for doing such a good job at bringing animal lovers together!

Cheers,
Mary
The one word comments made me crazy too. I usually clicked on spam and reported them to Zootoo whenever I found them. - They were usually removed by the next day if I did this. We should all be diligent in helping to police the site so that it stays relevant and helpful to those of us who want to take it seriously.
I would like to second Mary's suggestion about the "WOW" type comments. How many stories have we all seen where one person would make 4, 5, or 6 comments, usually something like - "WOW" followed by "Interesting" followed by "Amazing" followed by "Incredible" and then we would see their vocabulary expand to "That's neat" followed by their graduation from Kindergarden to first grade with a "Hard to believe".

I think that we all knew that all the poster was trying to do was run up their point totals and I'm sure I can speak for a lot of others when I say I would just like to reach out through their keyboards and "CHOKE THEM"........... There - I'm all better now. Sorry!!

It would be easy to put a character counter on the input box and make sure that someone enters a minimum number of characters - say 100 or whatever number is picked. 200 might be a little too much Mary. As for parsing the sentences for structure that would be a lot more difficult and even though I did try and pay attention to my English teachers in school I still fall off of the wagon from time to time and don't manage to construct a proper sentence.
With "minimum number of characters", there will still be the people who manipulate by deliberately writing things like, "m-m-m-m-m-m-m yyyyyyyuuuuummmmmmy!!!!!!!!!!!!" or "tooooooooo cooooooooooollllllllll; I l-l-l-l-oooooooo-v-v-v-e it". Proper sentences really shouldn't be required since it would make it too much like a homework assignment for English class. As long as the person is able to communicate in way that others understand, that should be sufficient. But I do agree that there should be SOME minimum standard. [Is this enough words for a reply????] :)
Ha! Hymcheng--I beat you by 21 seconds!
Despite the implications, I appreciate hearing an "official" statement to the effect that there WAS a (significant) "...amount of cheating on duplicate accounts and false reviews". Zootooers weren't really in a position to make such statements with certainty, but many of us were either well-aware or highly suspicious of these and felt a little helpless. On the other hand, some of the deviants became defensive and even offensive when accusations were made (or indirectly suggested). I suppose there will always be some people in a contest who "cheat" and try to bend the rules, but there should a way to weed them out BEFORE the contest ends. Thanks for the information.
To be honest, I don't know if I could get our supporters to log in that many hours again for another contest. I was putting in 40+ hours with the shelter and 4+ for zootoo every day. I did all the pictures and video for George and me to use. So each day was getting treats out of the cabinet, toys out of their toy box and Differ modeled at least 8 outfits a day before she would look at me like "done".

Our community does not have alot of folks in it. We had only like 850 folks signed up and I would say about 30% would zootoo if they thought about it. There was about 10% of that 30% were die-hard Zootoo max points every single day. We got started in Dec. So we were behind for a few months on some shelters.

Again, I don't know if we could get everybody to do it again.

As for far, I would love to see a "silent" contest. One that is not mentioned on how the points are earned. Example, one day only journal entries and journal comments would count. Next day news comments only. Next day, product/services reviews. And no mention of what will earn you points. This away, you just zootoo doing what you what and when and if you get points great. But even the points are hidden.

I know that does not sound right what I am saying, but can't think of how to word it. Right now, any contest is farthest from my mine. I have bigger problems.
I have to agree here too - I am currently burnt out. Also, while we had a great time doing it and I know everyone enjoyed the bonding that happened, we also said that for all the hours and effort we could have committed to another fundraiser that would have gotten us more than $5,000 in the end. (DAWS was a top 20 winner). It would be a hard sell to rally the troops for hours of Zootoo log on and video, comment and picture postings again.
Our shelter HSOV came second and while we did receive a sizable reward for our efforts, we still have our eyes on a new shelter, better spay and neuter programs, and no furry critter left behind. I think the way we all should be thinking right now is how do we build on the momentum that has been started. Without a doubt, all of our shelters (top 20 and not top 20) have gained volunteers, contacts, and publicity that we didn't already have. Let's use that wisely. Don't wait a month or two or three to look around and say what can we do now. Make those plans and put them into action at your next board meeting.

We all were discussing what to do if we didn't win while we anxiously waited for the announcement. The answer is, keep going the the direction we were going but instead of asking just for people to support us with joining, writing reviews and posting journals, ask them for exactly what we need. If you get folks involved, the zootoo part of it will become second nature. With the right attitudes, the right plans, and the right actions, many of us may not need a million dollar makeover next year. We will accomplish it own our own. Then for the next contest, we can all support the next little shelter down the road, the next county, or the next state over from us.

Many of the top 20 could still be in the same shape, with the same needs next contest but then again those same shelters could well be on their way to a better operation on their own and others could take their place. Those that finished outside the top 20 could have such a fire in their bellies that they out point the rest next time and once again the tours will show things that points alone can not. It doesn't matter that the next contest starts next month, next week or tomorrow. Just do what is in your heart.

If the final criteria is the same then we still are all on a level playing field. You have to have availibility to location, you still have to community behind you, you still have to have fiscal respondsibility and you have to have need. That doesn't matter if you live in a town of hundreds of thousands or just thousands. It's all relative and I think that Richard and his crew looked at it that way. Let's all quit worrying about how the next contest will be ran and look at how we are going to make our shelters better tomorrow.

A wise man told me once that you have to have a plan and then every little thing you do no matter how small, has to be a step toward completion of that plan. There will be more cold wet noses coming to our doors tomorrow and hopefully some going out the door to new homes. That part won't change ever so we know what we need to do. Let's just do it and let God sort out the rest.

Thank you again Zootoo. You accomplished what you set out to do this time and we will all be working toward our goals and waiting to see what you have in store for us next. One should not be content to creep when one has the desire to soar.
hymcheng
hymcheng
4 months ago
Flag this | Reply
Hi Becky,

You have made some excellent points. My opinion is that all top 20 shelters have walked away from the contest having accomplished the most important goal of all: realizing that when they work together as a team, they can make the impossible happen. The purpose of ZooToo to bring pet lovers together to help each other and the animals they love has been attained. Given this, what would participating in the second makeover contest further accomplish, since, according to my argument, the chances of the original bottom 17 to make it into next year's Top 3 are very slim? Would it not be better for the Top 17 to take the increased community support that they have coming out of the inaugural ZooToo contest and do their own makeover, rather than spend the time and energy for the second contest? Just throwing some ideas out at you.
Cassie3
Cassie3
4 months ago
Flag this | Reply
My husband kept saying that if the active users on this site donated $1 for every hour they spent on writing reviews, writing comments, taking photos, filming videos, uploading photos, and uploading videos to the shelters of their choice, the shelters would have ended up with more money and the users would have ended up with a life. ;-)
hymcheng
hymcheng
4 months ago
Flag this | Reply
Your husband is funny! I think my cats would agree with him. They have been so bored watching me at my computer ZooToo'ing away for the past half year!!!
LBC
LBC
4 months ago
Flag this | Reply
Your husband has a rye sense of humor and made me laugh. (Oh, yeah, my husband would agree) Thanks for sharing his view too.
Cassie3
Cassie3
4 months ago
Flag this | Reply
Yes, he would come home and say, "Wait. Let me guess. You're Zootooing." He even suggested that I was obsessive about it! Can you imagine!?!? Yes, I'll bet YOU can! ;-)
Well I think we were all guilty of leaving Zootoo widows in our dust. My husband, kids and dog all felt neglected as I zootoo'd for hours each evening.
Your husband is right--IF the shelters could actually GET the money from these people. They already donate supplies, use large amounts of gasoline transporting pets, etc. and try to maintain their own families while helping the homeless furry friends. Some of these costs may be tax-deductible, but the money has to put out FIRST.
hymcheng
hymcheng
4 months ago
Flag this | Reply
I have to agree with you on that one, Michele. From what I have observed, the majority of the volunteers who donate their time often do not donate their money as well to the shelter they support. The BIG donations usually come from those who do not actively volunteer. Shelter staff members also tend not to donate money (again, only based on my direct observations). In that sense, ZooToo is another way for those who don't/can't donate cash to still contribute to their shelter.
Cassie3
Cassie3
4 months ago
Flag this | Reply
Oh! I am glad you wrote this, hymcheng. I thought Michele was saying that the volunteers cannot be expected to do any more because they already do so much in donating time, supplies, gas, etc. I actually thought she was saying that people like me (not a volunteer, just a supporter) would let you-know-what freeze over before donating money! Now, no one get mad at me for this because I am laughing at my misinterpretation!
Cassie3
Cassie3
4 months ago
Flag this | Reply
MaxFund actually GETS donations from me. Although I am not a volunteer, I was the highest point earner. I have been to MaxFund once and that was two years ago to adopt Cassie. I spent time on Zootoo for a very worthy cause and to thank MaxFund for taking such good care of Cassie.

Having said that, I know that the MaxFund volunteers put in way more hours than I ever will and donate way more in cash and supplies than I ever will. I know they care about each animal that comes through their doors. I know because they allowed me to join their volunteer forum. They are a super group of people and I certainly did not intend to suggest that volunteers are a bunch of slackers who are not doing their parts for their shelters.
I know you didn't mean that. I was just trying to point out that the volunteers have limited funds yet already use some of their funds to help their shelters. They already give a lot (or whatever amount they can, which is a lot to them), so it isn't realistic to expect them to be able to get even MORE from them. It would be nice IF everyone did have unlimited funds and shelters became adequately funded.
I forgot to mention that I was NOT a volunteer for Pet Adoption League, but adopted three of their cats and have make numerous donations of money and supplies over the past several years; I was also their highest point-earner in the contest. Pet Adoption League volunteers invited me to join them, and I did go to a couple Adoption Fairs (and hope to go on more). They really give so much and undoubtedly don't receive the recognition they deserve. They are rewarded by knowing they have performed good deeds, by seeing pet after pet finding a new home, etc., but they are not truly compensation for their contributions--and, being the kind of people they are, don't expect to receive compensation. Shelter workers are an amazing group of people.
hymcheng
hymcheng
4 months ago
Flag this | Reply
Michele, I think it is interesting that you, Cassie3, and I are all the top points earner for our respective shelters, and yet none of us are volunteers but "merely" supporters. Like you, I adopted my 3 cats from my shelter Cat Welfare. I was very active on ZooToo trying to rally support. I visit the cats at my shelter every weekend, occasionally donating food and money, and purchasing products whose proceeds are donated back to Cat Welfare. In fact, Cat Welfare's rise to the Top 20 was driven largely, almost exclusively, by a small group of very dedicated supporters and volunteers. I'm curious to find out if the other Top 20 shelters' success was also largely due to the efforts of supporters rather than those with a more direct affiliation with their shelter.
The top Zootooer's for Bobbi and the Strays are volunteers who work with the animals. And yes, those of us who foster animals and transport others pay for those expenses ourselves. We lay out huge amounts of money without the benefit of a tax write-off.

I gave up my life for months because of this competition and would never do that again. I'm enjoying Zootoo at a more relaxed pace.

I was wondering how Zootoo was planning on handing out points in the next competition. I worked really hard to reach the Zoomaster level and will be really upset if they wipe everyone's points before the next competition begins. I'm looking forward to getting my samples when they're available. We've probably already gotten as many people as we can to join. It was an uphill battle all the way.

It will be interesting to see what happens.

By the way...great job everyone!
hymcheng
hymcheng
4 months ago
Flag this | Reply
oops...I meant bottom 17 and not top 17.
I think many Pet Adoption League active volunteers realized early on in the contest that zootooing to get more points and into the Top 20 would not necessarily pay off because of the rather arbitrary manner in which the makeover winner was to be chosen. They, instead, focused more on what was most important and urgent: helping the animals that were already in their care find forever homes. Pet Adoption League may not have won any money in the contest, but I believe they've gain numerous active volunteers and this will last a lot longer and be much more beneficial than winning a few thousand dollars.
oops, too...I meant "be much more beneficial than POSSIBLY winning a few thousand dollars."
Very good points. My shelter finished 4th in the points earnings and we are already thinking about whether or not we truly have a chance of winning or not. We originally thought that community meant what we do for the community, and we in fact have more community outreach programs then any shelter I know, but it turns out they were looking at how we are getting the community to help us. I was hoping that the next contest wouldn't start so soon because it was very draining. I was thinking for sure it would start again in October and I would have 5 months to recover.
hymcheng
hymcheng
4 months ago
Flag this | Reply
I agree, I think all of the original bottom 17 shelters should re-assess whether or not participation in the second contest will be worthwhile. In some ways, just like "American Idol", it might be better to make all of the original Top 20 ineligible, and "start fresh". That may not seem entirely fair to this year's participants, since we were the proverbial guinea pigs as ZooToo tries to work out any kinks in this contest. However, at least next year's Top 20 group will all start off on an equal footing and won't suffer from the same problems as we did. At least that is my hope. :-)
Being from the shelter who finished #8 in the contest and then ending up in the bottom 17 I can tell you that if there was to be another contest and it was to be based on points earned in a similiar fashion, we would be on equal footing with all other shelters. - Just because we got all those people to sign on and zootoo for hours does not mean that we could do it again. We don't feel any less or more deserving than any other shelter out there - I have to believe EVERY shelter needs help in some place or another. I know that we had TREMENDOUS community support the day of our Zootoo visit, we a an all volunteer run shelter - how much more community support can you get? - To say that we should not have another chance should we want to try again is crazy and only makes those shelters who did not make the top 20 and think the 17 should be ineligible sound like sour grapes.
But the possibility of making the top 20 (or bottom 17 of the top 20) ineligible in a second contest was just one of many ideas presented (with plausible explanations why) by Hymcheng--who supported a shelter that DID make the top 20. Perhaps if you read all (or more) of Hymcheng's viewpoints you'd have a better understanding of WHY it may not even make sense for such shelters to try again since the probability of "winning" woud/could be substantially lower than the odds in the first contest. [The "ineligibility" idea did not originate from someone supporting a shelter that did not make the top 20 and it had nothing to do with "sour grapes".]
Interesting points, Hymcheng. I'll need some time to reflect on your ideas. Meanwhile, some zootooers replying to my "Functional Illiteracy" journal entry have pointed out the ongoing problem the need for a digital camera has in these contests--perhaps more so in the Rescue Sweepstakes IF a human photo is required. There are already some discrepancies. I hope you receive a lot of interesting responses; most/all of us would like to see a more equitable contest.
Cassie3
Cassie3
4 months ago
Flag this | Reply
It has to be a photo of 1) you OR 2) of you and your pet OR 3) your pet. Requiring a "real" photo and one review for the Rescue Contest will at least make it more difficult to add a bunch of "dummy" accounts.
teddybearwitt
teddybearwitt
4 months ago
Flag this | Reply
You're right about the photo thing with one exception, there are people who do NOT have access to a digital camera. My parents helped with our shelter and I had to take my camera to take their picture and help them add it to their account. Not everyone has a camera or a kid with a camera with the capability to upload photos so the would rule out some people from entering.
It seems with every answer to a problem that is found, there are 3 other questions that pop up??? I personally think this discussion is just what everyone needs though, a board of people bringing up questions and possible solutions to be brought out. So many people will just sit back and complain but never discuss what the real problems are. Its easy to criticize when you're not the one out there trying to get things straightened out.
I also think you are all great and whatever the rules of the next contest, you are all winners.