2006 ENnies Judge Voting Poll/Thread

[Mark CMG]

Speaking of incumbents... is there a way to find out which judge voted for which product?

I think some of them start their own threads to discuss their choices, after the fact. Do a little search by their screenname and some keywords and I'll bet you turn some things up. I suppose, in a strange way, it's like giving out an extra nomination or recognition to those that didn't make it if one judge steps up and says that one of their choices didn't make the committee cut. Others, however, might feel it takes some of the focus away from the ones that earned the committee support. Is there enough love to go around?

 

[RangerWickett]

But for this year at least, we will have a judge SC, so I'm trying to alleviate some of the stress from that job by taking away some of the work. For example, I (or a staff member) will help maintain a database of the products shipped, entered, received, etc. I will keep track of the entry forms and cheques and payments. Hopefully, that will mean that the SC's job will be limited to receiving product, splitting it into piles, and shipping it out again. No mean task, but at least without the administrivia part of it, it should make the SC's life a little easier.

You and Hound could always move down to ATL and take advantage of cheaper postage. One of my friends works in real estate; he could hook you up nice. *grin*

 

[Quickbeam]

I fully trust the voters to elect a panel of competent judges. They have never failed to do so. If anything, I'm trusting them more than you and TB - I trust them to find good judges with fewer incumbents as a crutch

What I have said, and what keeps getting ignored, is that we might consider that there's more invovled than getting five people who can judge products for this year. If the trend MW shows continues, we have a health problem that ought to be addressed.

I'm apparently not making myself clear - this isn't about who does the better job of judging. I agree that the incumbent judges do a good job. I am also of the (apparently unpopular) opinion that there's a mess of people who vounteer every year who could do the job as well as the incumbents. No offense, guys, but if we thought you were indespensible, we'd not have elections at all.

I am instead trying to get people to consider that we might get better results in other areas, with little loss, if we made more full use of the resources at hand. This is not something that an uncoordinated voter base could be expected to handle on their own, especially when their non-presence is perhaps the most troubling issue.

Pretty much the same thing I've said before...albeit with a bit more frustration evident. I implicitly trust TB, Crothian, and other fixtures on the ENnies Judge panel, and strongly approve of the work they've done in the past. But I also want to see more than one seat change hands from year to year -- both for selfish reasons, and to gauge how this affects the entire process.

Without a change in the status quo, there is simply no way for us to understand how increased Judge turnover affects publisher opinions of the ENnies, the type and number of product submissions, or the array of products actually being recognized. There's no question that such a change would forcibly "punish" people like TB by removing them from Judge consideration for a year, and that is not my goal. My desire is to see other qualified individuals have the opportunity to represent our community through the ENnies. I like Jeff and respect what his presence adds to EN World (same for the other incumbents), and I know he understands that my comments aren't intended to harm him in any way. Ultimately, when you weigh all of the factors, I just think that limiting terms or the number of returning incumbents is the lesser evil.

There is every reason to expect that rookie judges wil perform admirably given their track record to date, and no reason to suspect that they will embarass or poorly represent EN World. Furthermore, this is the only circumstance that increases the likelihood that new/formerly involved publishers will submit their products IMO. If the same few people continue to act as Judges in perpetuity, then the awards are subject to the same set of biases and predispositions every year. After all, no matter how objective the judges may be, they're still human. I just cannot see how that is the best possible circumstance for the ENnies over time.

If you think "new blood" is necessary every year, then a better way to do it (IMHO) is to reserve a slot for a newbie, then just open the other four up. That both limits incumbents less (they have four possible slots instead of three) and keeps open the possibility of a complete overhaul of the judges table if the voters wish.

An excellent point.

 

[fusangite]

Actually, I agree. I would like to see turnover. There does not seem to be a lot of it right now.

Then the remedy is clear. Vote for different people; and campaign for them. If a majority agree with you, every single incumbent judge will be defeated.

 

[JoeGKushner]

I think some of them start their own threads to discuss their choices, after the fact. Do a little search by their screenname and some keywords and I'll bet you turn some things up. I suppose, in a strange way, it's like giving out an extra nomination or recognition to those that didn't make it if one judge steps up and says that one of their choices didn't make the committee cut. Others, however, might feel it takes some of the focus away from the ones that earned the committee support. Is there enough love to go around?

And you'd have to check out things like Malhavoc and Necromancer's message boards as well. Probably some Kenzer too since I recall some of their products fondly from the time I was doing the Ennies thing two years ago.

 

[Conaill]

Let me copy over some follow-ups from the other thread where I posted this question:

I don't mean that individual judges would have to spend any additional time to personally explain their choices. Not unless they really want to, of course.

But it seems to me that the judges' votes could easily be recorded and made public in some way. Shouldn't take much if any extra effort on behalf of the judges, but would provide a useful source of information for the voting public to decide whether they want to have individual judges coming back next year...

I'm not saying previous Ennies voting should be the *only* criterion to decide to keep a judge or not- far from it! But it may be a *useful* tool, and I can't really see any good reason not to make it public...

 

[Umbran]

If a majority agree with you, every single incumbent judge will be defeated.

If he campaigns for a specific set of five candidates, and the majority agrees with him on that entire specific slate, yes, you'll see a complete turnover. But otherwise, the incumbents can still win.

Campaigning for turnover in general ("Don't vote for incumbents!") is likely to fail, because there are usually more non-incumbent nominees. Given our current system, a minority focused on a small number of candidates can out-vote the majority spread over a larger group of candidates.

Now, I have to take an odd position - though we've been told campaigning is allowed, I for one think that's only because we haven't seen it in action. Even if it remains entirely civil - imagine 15 candidates each with their own camapaign thread, which they have a vested interest in keeping on the front page. Even a small number of supporters can keep the thread there without being mere "bumping".

We start seeing complaints when there's even four threads on a given topic on the front page of General at one time. Imagine 7, or 15 of them! This is going to make exactly zero of the apathetic folks more interested in voting, and probably turn off some of the people who are still interested enough to vote.

I thought I remembered a rule against campaigning, and I didn't question that becuase it makes sense. Active campaigning can turn General into a circus!

 

[Teflon Billy]

If he campaigns for a specific set of five candidates, and the majority agrees with him on that entire specific slate, yes, you'll see a complete turnover. But otherwise, the incumbents can still win...

Well, I don't think anyone was saying that Campaigning was going to guarantee a defeat for the incumbents. :\

People could still disagree with your choices and vote accordingly.

 

[Ankh-Morpork Guard]

Now, I have to take an odd position - though we've been told campaigning is allowed, I for one think that's only because we haven't seen it in action. Even if it remains entirely civil - imagine 15 candidates each with their own camapaign thread, which they have a vested interest in keeping on the front page. Even a small number of supporters can keep the thread there without being mere "bumping".

We start seeing complaints when there's even four threads on a given topic on the front page of General at one time. Imagine 7, or 15 of them! This is going to make exactly zero of the apathetic folks more interested in voting, and probably turn off some of the people who are still interested enough to vote.

I thought I remembered a rule against campaigning, and I didn't question that becuase it makes sense. Active campaigning can turn General into a circus!

Yeah, it would be crazy to have a bunch of threads like that. Honestly, the only thing I've done is throw a post in both of my SHs to get people to vote(and a link in my sig). Of course I'd like people to vote for me, but I'm amazed I've gotten so many votes as it is, and just think its a good idea to get more people to vote no matter who they pick.

I don't really like the idea of a single thread for each candidate that's simply a "Vote for me!" thread. That seems a bit...well...just seems a bit wrong. Can't explain why, just doesn't seem right. Not even counting the chaos it could cause if all the candidates did it and kept bumping them to make sure people see them.

 

[broghammerj]

I for one would have to agree with Umbran. (Wow. One doesn't say that very often , Just teasing man! Keep fighting the good fight.) The idea of campaigning could turn into a nightmare, clogging up board traffic, and is apparently is not what the majority of people here want since they aren't concerned enough to even vote.

My suggestion is for next year that you have a Super Ennies Weekend. Advertise the heck out of voting the whole week before and then make polls/campaigning available for the weekend. Really send people out with a bang, but keep things short and sweet.

My other alternative is to see who can wrestle a greased pig to the ground. Top five time winners are the judges.

Campaigning talk aside....You can never defeat Teflon Billy. After all he's Teflon. His name isn't, "Sweep Him Under The Carpet Billy"!