Extract from the jury decision: “By a lot of fragmentation and discontinuity they give us an opportunity to make a new reading of the reality as poetry can do. These two performances persuaded us to come out of the comfort zone fearless and tolerating the chaos in and around us being able to do a fresh arrangement with the words in new order.” “Do computers write poetry? Can a poet beat a machine in a poetry battle? Do the social media rede ne the way poetry is produced and performed? Through a specially designed code, a computer chooses randomly phrases from a predetermined Twitter hashtag and a database of verses which are selected by the artists. The phrases and the verses from the two sources are combined partly randomly and partly following a given pattern. By applying some certain restrictions (e.g. the number of syllables or words in each verse), a poem is created. At the same time, sound events are being produced by estimating the number of the letters of every incoming word as well as the total volume of the incoming data. When the project is presented live, the artists build and improvise on the poem that is created by the computer. For their performance, they use some of the phrases/ verses, disregard others and add some of their own. At the same time, they integrate in their performance the sounds that are created. As the phrases/ verses are chosen randomly and real-time from Twitter and the database of verses, the outcome varies each time the project is presented. During their performance, the artists interact with, develop and rede ne the word and sound structures that are created by the computer. They urge the audience to make meaning from fragmentation,dislocation and randomness as broken and seemingly unrelated slices of discourse.