2006 ENnies Judge Voting Poll/Thread

[diaglo]

I just voiced an opinion. Sheesh!

if it helps any, i've got 3 sisters. one of them my twin. i also am a second generation graduate from the U of Md. Go Terps.



i voted based on reviews, posts, familiarity, and past experience. no, i didn't vote for myself. but i tend never to do that.

 

[Hor Kai Lan]

A few random things:

1) On some level I find the ongoing disagreement between Telfon Billy and Umbran about voting patterns and policies funny since I voted for both for very different reasons. I now feel even better about my votes now. Honestly. Disagreement can be healthy.

2) Earlier I quoted someone else about "fresh blood" and made a tongue-in-cheek joke about this being a popularity contest and I was going to pull out the "Postcount" card... but that usually brings out the hounds... but regardless it seems that to at least a few of us there should be a built-in method to ensure new judges are added... Even Dextra alluded to the possibility... Well anyway... and this is directed to TB... but I'm curious to anyone's answer...

It seems on the surface you are against any changes to the electing/voting process... am I misreading that??? Isn't "fresh blood" a good thing every so often???

just honest question... and remember I voted for ya

 

[der_kluge]

So people, I'd be interested to know what has influenced your choice in judge selection.

I'll bite.

I voted for TB, Crothian, CL, Diaglo, and Joe.

Here are my reasons:

I know most of these people, and I know that they know what they are doing. I know they are all opinionated enough, and know enough about various systems to make an informed decision. At least, that was my reasoning with Crothian and TB. I voted for CL since I consider him a good friend, and I know he also has several years worth of experience doing this.

I voted for Diaglo because if anyone can be critical of a d20 product, I know he could. And I've read enough of his posts to know that he runs a good game, and his I value his ideas and opinions.

I voted for Joe because he's been an Ennie judge in the past, and the dude has over 400 reviews to his credit on ENWorld alone. A lot of the other folks wanting to be a judge have 0 reviews to their name. That's an important qualification. I'd like to see a comparison of review count to vote count.


I think those factors are what are important to me. I wanted to vote for Nakia but I don't feel like he has enough exposure to a wide variety of game systems like some of the others have. He might, but he doesn't post enough for me to know. I've met him, and while I really like Nakia, and think he's a great person, I'm not sure he'd be opinionated enough to do it.

I wanted to vote for Xath because I really like her, and have met her in RL, but I also am not sure she is opinionated enough. She seems far too mild-mannered and polite to be an Ennies judge.

So, I don't think age, or gender, or the speeches, or any publishing experience, or anything else really matters. I think what matters to me is whether or not someone has a broad range of experience, and I know can be opinionated enough for the job. I'm certain post-count might play a large role in that, because unlike a single voting period from this thread, in my mind, people run for this job all year long.

 

[Crothian]

Why is fresh blood good? Or more importantly, why is it better then a few years or more experience of doing the job?

 

[Umbran]

Umbran claims that it is to get more people voting...but more people voting to what end if it starts to eliminate candidates who currently draw large amounts of the voter interest?

Candidates who currently draw large interest from those wo voted, perhaps. But large interest overall? I see 1200 people currently logged in, and so far in days of voting, only 404 votes. Nobody here is getting large interest, relative to the potential voting population, TB. The whole election isn't getting much interest.

At what point do you just make it a raffle?

Good question. And at what point do you just take the five folks you kow are gong to win anyway, and dispense with the time-consuming formality?

 

[Teflon Billy]

It seems on the surface you are against any changes to the electing/voting process... am I misreading that??? Isn't "fresh blood" a good thing every so often???

I literally have no idea. it certainly isn't a "given" if that's what you are asking.

I certainly wouldn't make a blanket statement to that effect, as I would have to have some idea that the "new blood" was at least as competent as the "old blood" before I'd be willing to say they deserved a spot.

I guess what I am saying is that "Fresh Blood" isn't "a good thing every so often" simply becasue it's Fresh.

That said, I voted for Xath, Keeper of Secrets and Quickbeam as well as CL and Crothian... so I guess I'm not totally averse to the idea.

But it's got nothing to do with their having never been judges before.

just honest question... and remember I voted for ya

Why thank you for your support citizen

 

[Hor Kai Lan]

Why is fresh blood good? Or more importantly, why is it better then a few years or more experience of doing the job?

Well this is the 2nd time in this thread that you've posted after me challenging my view Crothian... its ok... its all good... a paranoid person might think you're after me... then I realized with your 37k posts there must be 3645 other posters like me with 10-20 posts where you have posted immediately afterwards I know its not personal

Anyhow... well how bout for starters because a few people in the community this year and by the sounds of it previous years expressed an interest in doing so... and those people who have said "fresh blood" is something we should explore range from me (the everyman lurker) to a few people running to Dextra who's organizing the whole ball of wax. So its just not the ramblings of someone who might be bitter because they were passed over for selection. I believe its being suggested for healthy good reasons.

My question back to you would be... why does it appear you are desperate to hold on to this power??? Why is so important that the same people judge??? You must have read the other 1st timers' qualifications like I did. Some of those people striked me as responsible, dedicated people who wish to make the Ennies a success. Did I miss something???

I'm sure if the same people judge every year... the event would be ok. But isn't there a desire to evolve??? Isn't possible that someone new might bring that one idea that everyone else says, 'but of course... why didn't we think of that' ???

 

[MavrickWeirdo]

Well this is the 2nd time in this thread that you've posted after me challenging my view Crothian... its ok... its all good... a paranoid person might think you're after me... then I realized with your 37k posts there must be 3645 other posters like me with 10-20 posts where you have posted immediately afterwards I know its not personal

Yup, that's how he got his high post count.

 

[Crothian]

Well this is the 2nd time in this thread that you've posted after me challenging my view Crothian... its ok... its all good... a paranoid person might think you're after me... then I realized with your 37k posts there must be 3645 other posters like me with 10-20 posts where you have posted immediately afterwards I know its not personal

Don't be paraniod you are a good hour and half to 2 hours away.

My question back to you would be... why does it appear you are desperate to hold on to this power??? Why is so important that the same people judge??? You must have read the other 1st timers' qualifications like I did. Some of those people striked me as responsible, dedicated people who wish to make the Ennies a success. Did I miss something???

Judging is damn hard work, previous judges who want to do it again (and not all of them do) have proven their worth and are ready to rise to the challenge again. I really like the ENnies and I know these judges do to and they are willing to do the hard work to make the ENNies great. While there are some people running that I think might do a good job I really don't know that they won't break in the middle of trying to read and evaluate 200 RPG books. It is harder then it sounds. My first year was way harder then I imagined even after reading from all the previous judges how much work it really is. And that was an easy year since we had mostly d20.

I'm sure if the same people judge every year... the event would be ok. But isn't there a desire to evolve??? Isn't possible that someone new might bring that one idea that everyone else says, 'but of course... why didn't we think of that' ???

Or maybe they won't. Maybe they will be in fact not be any good. I'm not against new blood, but its a chance and a gamble. A previous judge is a known factor.

 

[Teflon Billy]

Candidates who currently draw large interest from those wo voted, perhaps. But large interest overall? I see 1200 people currently logged in, and so far in days of voting, only 404 votes. Nobody here is getting large interest, relative to the potential voting population, TB. The whole election isn't getting much interest.

And you're certain that the way to draw interest from the crowd is to eliminate incumbency?

At what point do you just make it raffle?

Good question.

Answer it.

I'll answer yours below

And at what point do you just take the five folks you kow are gong to win anyway, and dispense with the time-consuming formality?

Simple. Worry about it when that happens.

There has yet to be an identical 5 person judging comittee in the history of the awards. So far the judges have been...

• Mark CMG
• CRGreathouse
• Eric Noah
• Piratecat
• Joe G Kushner
• Crothian
• Alsih2o
• Psion
• Cthulu's Librarian
• Colonel Hardisson
• Teflon Billy

If I've missed anyone, hey; Bygones

And yes, the voting has favored the incumbents; but in the absence of misconduct or incompetence it should favor them.

But that said, there has usually been one new face in the crowd each year, and again--on the absence of misconduct or incompetence--that's pretty good as well.

All I'm saying is that the current system seems to be working. The Awards are growing in prestige, the job is getting done to the satisfaction of the electorate...even the number of voters participating grows every year (and seems to be this year as well) which is the concern you expressed.

And yet you posit some kind of explosive growth in voter turnout--rather than the steady growth we've seen--if you eliminate (or limit) incumbency.

I'm just not sure why you posit that.