In order to fight rip-offs of submitted design, contests could be conducted in two phases: 1. A conceptual phase and 2. A fine-tuning phase.

In the conceptual phase, entries are private. Other designers can only see who entered. In this phase, designers submit concepts for the design for which they get feedback and ratings from the CH. The CH then selects a number of concepts which he likes and those designers progress to phase-2.

In phase-2, the selected designs become visible, but no new designers can enter the contest. In this round, designers fine-tune their submission from the first phase. It is not allowed to make conceptual changes (especially adapting one design to the concept o another designer). The CH choses a winner from the fine-tuned designs.

It might be interesting to think about awarding a small amount of the total prize to all designers making it to the second phase as a small reward for their effort.

This is getting beyond a joke~ more and more requests for design & coded contests - and most are for the barest minimum in prize money... they don't ask for one page, but for a fully functioning website !

I'm fed up with being abused by CHs whenever I point them towards the prizes help page to enlighten them as to the minimum prize levels as well as showing them 'the no coding' line at the bottom of that page.

Either there is or there isn't a coding category. At the moment, it is all up in the air.

Please, either allow a coding category - with a 'buyer beware' notice as to the quality they may be getting,

OR at the very least, when a contest is being created , show in 'big capital letters' that there is no coding category - design only at this time...

Unless of course I'm wrong and you are allowing these contests to go ahead with no thoughts to the quality of the final project the contest holder will receive.
I've seen some of the coding that's been passed around here and I can see a lot of CH's being ripped off with the final deliverables - where the html has been spit out of a graphics program and where html pages don't validate and are not cross browser compatible.

99designs needs to make a stand one way or another... and certainnly clarify the position so that both contest holders and designs know where they stand !

Many 400$+ contests are simply overwhelmed with submissions. This is potentially bad for both the designers and the contest holders:

- A large enough number of options (sometimes over 1000) can be unhealthy. A contest holder might not have the time to properly analyze designs and read descriptions, ending up in overlooking really great ideas.

- Contest holders are usually not designers themselves, and sometimes lack the experience required to properly review submissions. A very large number of entries often results in confusion for the client (whereas design should be a solution) and frustration for designers who believe that their work has been underrated.

- Top designers are often discouraged by high-priced contests that have been flooded with hundreds of mediocre designs within the first few hours, especially when the brief is ambiguous. These cases often turn into a sort of lottery, and the client ends up with a winning design that is worth only a fraction of the money they have spent. Some of these cases are also discussed outside of 99designs and reflect poorly on the community.

- Clients expect to receive functional, quality designs, regardless of their experience in reviewing and rating graphic design.

What is a designer level-gate?

I suggest a system of settings through which a client can select (after being informed) the level above which a designer has to be in order to participate.

What would be the benefits of implementing options for designer level-gates?

- Give contest holders the freedom to choose between quantity and quality, after being informed of the consequences of their settings.

- The settings could be altered even after the contest has begun, if the client sees fit. If a certain contest holder believes that their project has not received enough submissions, they could always lower the gate.

- Clients could also be informed of the number of active (within the last few weeks) designers under each level-gate setting, to know what to expect once they activate a certain option.

- Contest level-gate settings filters could be implemented in the browsing section to help speed up the process of searching for projects.

- Designers would be encouraged to spend more time working on a particular design, rather than take up the "I'll just try my luck" strategy, or "blanket participation".

Downsides of this feature, and their solutions:

Problem:

There are good designers on 99designs that are not very active. They obviously have not earned a high level, but why shouldn't they be allowed to participate? The levels system is not perfect, but the contest-holder is not in on the details. What if they have the winning idea?

Solution:

Allow for participation requests messages. Good designers will know what to say, what portfolio to show and what links to provide to convince a client to allow for their submissions.

Problem:

Clients might tend to set their level-gate settings too high, not receive enough submissions, thus having 99designs loose valuable business and reputation, not to mention making it very difficult for beginner designers to level-up.

Solution:

Grant every designer the option to ask for a 99designs portfolio level review from the staff once every couple of months (great designs that have not even been selected as finalists in contests deserve to be rewarded). This, along with other improvements of the leveling system, as issues arise, will maintain a steady (healthy) flow of submissions for all contests, and also encourage beginner designers to work hard and evolve within the community and as professionals.

Thank you for reading,

Andrei Cosma

There are only two options right now for the CH when they are looking through possible designs: eliminate and award winner. There should be a third option, that is used as the contest is ongoing for "finalist".

Basically, by day 2 I've had 2-3 designs that I consider finalists, they'll be in the final running to win. However, there are at least 4 other designers still working through iterations of their design that get all muddled up in the mix of new and un-eliminated designs.

It would be a lot easier if there was some delineation between "finalists" and everyone else, much like what is done now in the designer's profile with "folio", "contests won" and "new submissions".

Maybe it's just me, but I think it's a little discouraging that every time I check my contests, the first thing I see is the ones I've been cut from or decided to leave, often with a shiny gold "WON!" announcement that was awarded to someone else. Then, to add insult to injury, I have to scroll through the whole thing to get to that nice, fresh list of new contests I might want to participate in.

To help maintain designer morale (especially for newbies), I think it would be a good idea to add "Remove Selected" checkboxes to contests you've withdrawn from or were cut from just like there are for the ones you're only watching. Another possibility is having buttons or a dropdown list including "Remove Contests Withdrawn From" and "Remove Contests Lost". Just include an "Are you sure?" dialogue box or something to make sure they're not removed by mistake by those who want to keep them.

I'd like to suggest an ability for designers to rate a contest after it has ended. This could be extended to allowing designers to rate several parameters like "quality of brief", "quality of feedback given", "promptness", etc. in order to give each contest an overall rating which could be displayed in a CH's profile or in the Health status of each subsequent contest they hold.
I think this would reward good contest holders by enabling them to attract the good designers and would alert designers to CHs who are lazy or overly negative with feedback. It would also encourage holders to be more responsive and give better feedback which benefits the designers in the community.