Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="eyebeams" data-source="post: 3330990" data-attributes="member: 9225">I think that having personal insults and an actual threat of violence from other posters pass without moderation indicates something that's not partucularly healthy about the climate of discussion regarding the ENnies. I can't think of another thread on this site where a comment like:Would ever be tolerated. As a result, while I started off in this thread disagreeing with Tim Dugger in almost every respect, I can now see some merit in what he has to say. This is specifically because of how this thread has played out."Abuse" is a perjorative term. I don't think any individual is motivated to consciously adulterate the awards' integrity or would be, in most situations. While people have been seen fit to take comments personally, I have always discussed a *systemic* situation that has to do with the organization of the awards.Currently, the judges have a regular proportion of people with non-trivial industry ties and repeat position holders. This isn't because individuals want to necessarily make sure Crothian or Joe G Kushner is always a judge or something. But it hardly explores the diversity of fan opinion to have the same double handful of people opt in and out year after year.I have *never* claimed there was individual agency involved. Before you reply or polish off any of the stawmen who have been used to raggedness in this debate, remember that.Changing the judge selection rules would lead to judging from a large, variegated pool of fandom. I would find arguments as to why this is not desireable to be, well, pretty *interesting* to read.I can't say much more about the idea of organizational bias without the risk of it being conflated with accusations personal bias or conspiracy, when they are not the same thing. But I can't stop anyone from acting like they are, either.</blockquote>

Verification