[ENnies] Three questions for everyone

[Umbran]

Well, yes, but you need to have limits on what qualifies for entry

Quite true. And I wasn't attempting to say that we shouldn't get rid of all qualifications for entry. I was addressing Ichabod's point, by saying that merely being issued under a different licence is not a major determiner in quality. I think the only "bias due to closer association to WotC" is a matter of marketing, not of license.

 

[Mark CMG]

So, are the whiners who provoked this poll...

I think your name calling is unwarranted. I created this poll and can assure you that no "whiners" provoked me to do so. This has been a productive proccess. I see no need to cast aspersions on the people who expressed their opinions that prompted me fashion this outlet for everyone's opinions.

As it stands now the majority would like to see some policy in place to ensure that some new blood is included each year. An overwhelming majority like that the nomination committee is made up of professional reviewers and regular fans. The overwhelming majority also prefers that all products bearing the d20 logo are included providing that those products produce Open Game Content. I'm confident that the results of this poll will be taken into consideration as the ENnies continue to grow.

 

[Teflon Billy]

...As it stands now the majority would like to see some policy in place to ensure that some new blood is included each year...

Am I reading somethnig wrong? I thought the clear winner in that category was option "F".

 

[ColonelHardisson]

Edited a very badly-worded post.

 

[Mark CMG]

Am I reading somethnig wrong? I thought the clear winner in that category was option "F".

The majority of voters so far want to see some policy that ensures at least one new blood is on the committee each year. A number of them just wish to see that even more are on the committee.

 

[Mark CMG]

That's true, but the number of votes for the other options in that category add up to a greater number.

We've posted at roughly the same time, but this is correct.

While I still disagree with any type of restrictions, since they would help ensure that long-time members become marginalized, the results of the poll should be discussed further.

Well, it isn't really a rstriction since at does not disallow anyone from running. It is, however, an ensurance that there is new blood always involved in the process at the nomination committee level which would be a very inclusive policy, IMO. I'm sure anyone who has some need for discussion will add their voice to this thread but the idea behind a poll is to allow those who are reluctant to become embroiled in debate to still have some say by means of voting. Thankfully there is this polling mechanism so that people who do not wish to be dragged out from anonymity can still give their input. I, for one, value it immensely.

 

[ColonelHardisson]

Edited a follow-up to a badly-worded post.

 

[Mark CMG]

Edited a follow-up to a badly-worded post.

Fair enough. No harm done.

 

[Mark CMG]

Edited a follow-up to a badly-worded post.

Fair enough. No harm done.

 

[ColonelHardisson]

Edit, as above.