Branstorming for ENnies 2003 -- improvements, changes, etc
- Thread starter EricNoah
- Start date
EarthsShadow
First Post
If you did actually put the ENnies awards nominations and awards logos on the books that made it, then all of those gamers out there who don't know what the ENnies are would ask the question, "What are the ENnies?" and maybe would be even interested in seeing a voting poll in their local gaming stores next year to have them mail to you.
Orcus
First Post
I have to admit I am intrigued by this idea....
Here is another point: I think you should make available the ENnie award seal for products that are just NOMINATED. Since I think we are all in agreement that it is quite an honor to be nominated. Sort of like the Academy Awards. You always hear "Acadamy Award Nominated [fill in the blank]." That would make more people ask "what they heck is that?" and increase awareness.
[EarthShadow--great minds think alike
]Clark
Last edited:
ColonelHardisson
What? Me Worry?
Orcus said:
Yes, I think that is a great idea. To be honest, I sort of assumed companies would do that anyway.
EricNoah
Adventurer
I'm pretty sure Russ's intention is that indeed anyone nominated can use the ENnies "medal" image in their ads, catalogs, websites, etc.
I wonder how a ranking system (rank each product, you can't give two products the same number), a rating system (give each product a score, you could give two products the same score), or a multiple selection system (checkmark any that you think deserve to win this award) work out differently, statistically speaking?
I wonder how a ranking system (rank each product, you can't give two products the same number), a rating system (give each product a score, you could give two products the same score), or a multiple selection system (checkmark any that you think deserve to win this award) work out differently, statistically speaking?
EricNoah
Adventurer
Educating the Public
Another thing we could try to do is to try to have a bigger gap of time between the announcement of the nominees and the voting. This would give the smaller companies time to put together, say, an indepth look at their products on their websites. I think the fact that all of the Free Products/Web Enhancements were available for inspection by the public probably made a big difference in how that particular contest went, for instance.
Russ could also then consider focusing on maybe one category per day, highlighting the features and excellent qualities of the nominees in that category. Also links from each product listed to its reviews in his d20 Reviews/Guide.
Ok, here's another thought ... maybe not a great one ... limit the voting to those who are registered at EN World, and maybe temporarily shut off new registrations for a week before the voting starts and during the voting. Then maybe make the voting period shorter. Might make sure we're getting our community. On the other hand ... there are a TON of lurkers out there who enjoy the site, visit regularly, but don't post on the message boards (even if they read them a lot). So they could be as well informed as anyone. Thus, this probably isn't a great solution... Forget I brought it up.
Another thing we could try to do is to try to have a bigger gap of time between the announcement of the nominees and the voting. This would give the smaller companies time to put together, say, an indepth look at their products on their websites. I think the fact that all of the Free Products/Web Enhancements were available for inspection by the public probably made a big difference in how that particular contest went, for instance.
Russ could also then consider focusing on maybe one category per day, highlighting the features and excellent qualities of the nominees in that category. Also links from each product listed to its reviews in his d20 Reviews/Guide.
Ok, here's another thought ... maybe not a great one ... limit the voting to those who are registered at EN World, and maybe temporarily shut off new registrations for a week before the voting starts and during the voting. Then maybe make the voting period shorter. Might make sure we're getting our community. On the other hand ... there are a TON of lurkers out there who enjoy the site, visit regularly, but don't post on the message boards (even if they read them a lot). So they could be as well informed as anyone. Thus, this probably isn't a great solution... Forget I brought it up.
Re: Educating the Public
Wow... I was reading through all the posts about to suggest just this, and just as I get to the end, there it is. I think you should look at this twice, Eric. The comments about the many WotC victories can be read in one of three ways (I think...):
#1 "We, the EN World community, given a chance to pick the best products, were temporarily blinded by marketing and name recognition and failed to pick the best, instead picking the most popular."
#2 "We, the EN World community, picked the best products, and they nearly all were published by WotC. That's just not fair, and we don't want that to happen next year. WotC will always have the best products and must, therefore, be excluded."
#3 "A bunch of other people whose opinion we don't share showed up during the voting and stole the awards for WotC because there was a link on Wizards.com (or some other site or sites dedicated to Wizards product). They've never even heard of the other nominees and we want to keep them out next time because they're ignorant."
If the case is #1 or #2... well, everyone should just suck it up (in my imbecilic and verging on illiterate opinion). Just be more careful next year. WotC should not be punished because the community here had messed up priorities this year or because they make really good stuff. The d20 publishers shouldn't be punished either -- and stripping them of the chance to compete fairly against the biggest competitor is actually a punishment; as several of them have said, they don't want the "hand up." If it is #1 or #2, it's not a problem endemic to the awards. In the case of #1, it's a problem with the community, and the community needs to address it right here on these message boards. If it's #2, it's not a problem at all -- the best women and men won. Yay, WotC! Yay, EN World! The awards were bestowed to the best products!
If the case is #3 (and I reckon most people complaining about the result think it is #3, though I could be completely wrong -- and often am!), then the voting needs to be limited to the community and the community alone. Publishers can push people to the site up to a week before the awards to register, you can warn the lurkers that they have to register a week early, etc. The point is that if you can't register during the actual voting, it dramatically reduces the influx of casual people showing up and voting simply because the website of their favorite publisher tells them to. How many fans will be rabid enough to go to a site they've never heard of, register, and come back a week later to vote. Many, many fewer; even if this route would not get rid of all "outsiders" from the voting, it would certainly make the EN World community's vote count a lot more.
I think if there is actually a problem with the awards due to outside gerrymandering, this is the best solution (perhaps combined with the instant run-off voting people were suggesting with people rating their choices 1 to 5). However, I also tend to think that maybe folks here aren't giving enough credence to #2; maybe people just really, really liked OA, CoC, MotP and several other WotC products, and those people are actually a majority of bona fide members of this community. I think it's just the way mass votes work -- popular stuff does better. Maybe just accept it and figure next year, as d20 continues to spread across the game world, more non-WotC products will prevail.
At the end of the day, there's really no shame in losing to WotC and no shame in having voted for a WotC product or bestowed an award on a WotC product. After all, they sure do make some durn purdy books!
Great job on organizing and bestowing the awards, regardless! I enjoyed the ceremony and I thought the winners were gracious and delivered thoughtful and kind speeches. Having attended many award ceremonies for video games that had much larger budgets and fulltime, professional organizing committees, I can assure you, that stuff is not always a given. In fact, most game award ceremonies are plagued not only by "inaccuracy" but also by miserable, soul-numbing ceremonies.
I think six months from now, all that will be left over from this year's Ennies (other than some logos on some products) will be the collective fond memory of Eric Noah miming "no grabby by the top" with the award at the beginning of the ceremony. It was a hoot.
Aaron
EricNoah said:Ok, here's another thought ... maybe not a great one ... limit the voting to those who are registered at EN World, and maybe temporarily shut off new registrations for a week before the voting starts and during the voting. Then maybe make the voting period shorter. Might make sure we're getting our community. On the other hand ... there are a TON of lurkers out there who enjoy the site, visit regularly, but don't post on the message boards (even if they read them a lot). So they could be as well informed as anyone. Thus, this probably isn't a great solution... Forget I brought it up.
Wow... I was reading through all the posts about to suggest just this, and just as I get to the end, there it is. I think you should look at this twice, Eric. The comments about the many WotC victories can be read in one of three ways (I think...):
#1 "We, the EN World community, given a chance to pick the best products, were temporarily blinded by marketing and name recognition and failed to pick the best, instead picking the most popular."
#2 "We, the EN World community, picked the best products, and they nearly all were published by WotC. That's just not fair, and we don't want that to happen next year. WotC will always have the best products and must, therefore, be excluded."
#3 "A bunch of other people whose opinion we don't share showed up during the voting and stole the awards for WotC because there was a link on Wizards.com (or some other site or sites dedicated to Wizards product). They've never even heard of the other nominees and we want to keep them out next time because they're ignorant."
If the case is #1 or #2... well, everyone should just suck it up (in my imbecilic and verging on illiterate opinion). Just be more careful next year. WotC should not be punished because the community here had messed up priorities this year or because they make really good stuff. The d20 publishers shouldn't be punished either -- and stripping them of the chance to compete fairly against the biggest competitor is actually a punishment; as several of them have said, they don't want the "hand up." If it is #1 or #2, it's not a problem endemic to the awards. In the case of #1, it's a problem with the community, and the community needs to address it right here on these message boards. If it's #2, it's not a problem at all -- the best women and men won. Yay, WotC! Yay, EN World! The awards were bestowed to the best products!
If the case is #3 (and I reckon most people complaining about the result think it is #3, though I could be completely wrong -- and often am!), then the voting needs to be limited to the community and the community alone. Publishers can push people to the site up to a week before the awards to register, you can warn the lurkers that they have to register a week early, etc. The point is that if you can't register during the actual voting, it dramatically reduces the influx of casual people showing up and voting simply because the website of their favorite publisher tells them to. How many fans will be rabid enough to go to a site they've never heard of, register, and come back a week later to vote. Many, many fewer; even if this route would not get rid of all "outsiders" from the voting, it would certainly make the EN World community's vote count a lot more.
I think if there is actually a problem with the awards due to outside gerrymandering, this is the best solution (perhaps combined with the instant run-off voting people were suggesting with people rating their choices 1 to 5). However, I also tend to think that maybe folks here aren't giving enough credence to #2; maybe people just really, really liked OA, CoC, MotP and several other WotC products, and those people are actually a majority of bona fide members of this community. I think it's just the way mass votes work -- popular stuff does better. Maybe just accept it and figure next year, as d20 continues to spread across the game world, more non-WotC products will prevail.
At the end of the day, there's really no shame in losing to WotC and no shame in having voted for a WotC product or bestowed an award on a WotC product. After all, they sure do make some durn purdy books!
Great job on organizing and bestowing the awards, regardless! I enjoyed the ceremony and I thought the winners were gracious and delivered thoughtful and kind speeches. Having attended many award ceremonies for video games that had much larger budgets and fulltime, professional organizing committees, I can assure you, that stuff is not always a given. In fact, most game award ceremonies are plagued not only by "inaccuracy" but also by miserable, soul-numbing ceremonies.
I think six months from now, all that will be left over from this year's Ennies (other than some logos on some products) will be the collective fond memory of Eric Noah miming "no grabby by the top" with the award at the beginning of the ceremony.
It was a hoot.Aaron
EricNoah
Adventurer
Been thinking about Ryan's idea...
I personally am feeling less and less "turned on" by Ryan's suggestion. The original way has the judges picking the five best products, and thus the nomination really means something and you know those are probably among the five best products, and that the winner (whoever it turns out to be by popular vote) will be one of the five best products that year. The "new" way has the judges evaluating the five most popular products, and thus the nomination means a lot less, and there's no assuring that the "winner" is actually among the best from that year. If I had to pick the lesser of two evils, I'd say voting for the one most popular of the five best is preferable to judging the one best out of the five most popular.
In addition, I forsee problems with keeping juging results secret beyond the end of the contest. If I were about to vote on a slate of potential judges, I would want to know what their voting records were (from previoius years) so I'd have a chance to select someone who matched my taste in products. And I just get a feeling that having a very few elected people pick "one best" instead of "five best" will put a huge burden on them and create unnecessary conflict in our community.
I personally am feeling less and less "turned on" by Ryan's suggestion. The original way has the judges picking the five best products, and thus the nomination really means something and you know those are probably among the five best products, and that the winner (whoever it turns out to be by popular vote) will be one of the five best products that year. The "new" way has the judges evaluating the five most popular products, and thus the nomination means a lot less, and there's no assuring that the "winner" is actually among the best from that year. If I had to pick the lesser of two evils, I'd say voting for the one most popular of the five best is preferable to judging the one best out of the five most popular.
In addition, I forsee problems with keeping juging results secret beyond the end of the contest. If I were about to vote on a slate of potential judges, I would want to know what their voting records were (from previoius years) so I'd have a chance to select someone who matched my taste in products. And I just get a feeling that having a very few elected people pick "one best" instead of "five best" will put a huge burden on them and create unnecessary conflict in our community.
