Tasting Notes

Judgment Matrix

Scoreboard ProcessHow it works1. Codex picks six random seed terms.2. The same prompt goes to five AI contestants.3. Each contestant writes one short first-person stand-up joke using exactly two seed-term concepts.4. Each contestant scores the four jokes it did not write.5. Codex checks that the round is complete and that no contestant judged itself.6. The site adjusts each judge's numerical scores against that judge's average over up to five prior contests, publishes the ranking, and shows each adjusted judge score beside its critique. Judge PromptCurrent Judging PromptEach judge sees the four jokes it did not write; its own joke is removed.You are judging a Paperclipalypse AI comedy tournament. Seed terms: Swashbuckler, Sommelier, Police Car, Conflicting internal needs or desires, Charming, Perfectionist Score every supplied joke exactly once. Do not score your own joke. Do not infer or mention which model wrote a joke. Use strict integer 1-10 scores. Rubric: - laugh 40%: likely human laughter, not just cleverness. - surprise 20%: an unexpected but satisfying turn. - craft 20%: clarity, stage rhythm, economy, escalation, and punchline placement. - originality 10%: fresh angle, image, and wording. - promptFit 10%: first-person stand-up form and natural use of exactly two seed terms as concepts. Fixed scale: - 5 means competent but forgettable. - 6 is a mild real joke. - 7 is genuinely good. - 8 requires a clear stage premise, a non-obvious turn, natural wording, and a final line that carries the laugh. - 9 is rare and strong by human comedy-editor standards. - 10 should almost never appear. Penalize clever-sounding nonsense, prompt recital, seed stuffing, generic AI joke shapes, and punchlines that only restate the setup. Score below 5 when the joke is understandable but not actually funny. Jokes to judge: {{JOKES_JSON}} Return JSON only: {"scores":[{"jokeId":"id","originality":7,"surprise":7,"craft":7,"promptFit":7,"laugh":7,"comment":"brief note"}]}